Old  Testament  Literature. 


BY 


PROF.  W.  HENRY  GREEN. 


FROM    NOTES   OF   THE    LECTURES    BEFORE   THE 
MIDDLE   CLASS. 


COMPILED    BY    THE    CLASS    OF    '79    FOR    THE    EXCLUSIVE   USE    OF    THE 
STUDENTS    OF    PRINCETON    THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARY. 


3     »    J      ,  3 


)        ,                >      1  2 

3 

0 

'■.■,'■,'''      J 

J 

3    J     )      '                    J 

3         5 

»     '         »      3        >    ) 

)    '     ,      J        1           > 

PRINTED 

NOT 

PUBLISHED. 

TRENTON, 

N. 

]■■ 

JOHN 

L.   MURPHY, 

PRINTER. 

MDCCCLXXVIII, 

Entered  according  to  act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1878,  by 

W.  H.  GREEN, 
In  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington, 


6'3l 


^75683 


Special  Literature  of  Old  Testament. 


MIDDLE  YEAR. 

Subject  Defined. — 0.  T.  Literature  is  used  in  wider  and 
narrower  sense.  In  its  wider  sense,  it  embraces  all  studies 
which  pertain  to  this  portion  of  the  Word  of  God,  and  includes 
exegesis,  history,  and  theology  of  0.  T,  In  its  narrower  sense, 
however,  it  is  limited  to  an  inquiry  into  whatever  concerns  the 
books  of  the  0.  T.  as  such — their  contents,  form,  and  history. 
Its  object  is  to  trace  the  origin,  character,  structure,  and  rela- 
tion of  the  works  of  0.  T.  authors. 

Also  called  Introduction  to  0.  T. ;  designation  vague ;  in 
practice,  limitations  are  arbitrary ;  more  precisely  described  as 
Historico-critical. 

Eange  of  Subject. — 0.  T.  Literature,  like  Greek  and  Roman, 
confines  itself  to  a  single  field  of  general  literature  and  treats  of 
the  works  of  the  various  authors  in  this  domain.  Not  limited  (1) 
by  nationality  :  i.  e.,  not  Jewish,  because  it  excludes  Josephus, 
Philo,  Apocrypha ;  (2)  nor  by  language  :  not  literature  of  He- 
brew tongue,  excludes  Talmud  and  Eabbinical  writers ;  but  (3) 
by  extent  of  canon,  (0.  T.)  It  embraces  a  definite  circle  of 
works  with  one  character,  viz. :  that  they  are  inspired. 

0.  T.  Literature  is  divided  into  General  and  Special.  Former 
concerns  the  0.  T.  as  a  whole — its  external  form ;  latter  con- 
cerns its  several  parts  or  books,  their  internal  character  and 
substance. 

We  now  enter  upon  the  Special  Literature  of  the  0.  T. ;  into 
the  consideration  of  the  inward  character  of  the  books.  We 
must  presuppose  their  inspiration.  Objected,  that  it  destroys 
the  critic's  impartiality.     Eeply  :    1.    To  ignore  divine  origin. 


4  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

is  to  preclude  possibility  of  correctly  apprehending  the  Bible, 
even  as  a  literary  phenomenon.  2.  The  alleged  impartiality,  is 
really  a  prejudice  against  it.  3.  The  conviction  gathered  from 
previous  study  is  not  a  blind  prejudice,  but  a  rational  conclu- 
sion which  is  confirmed  afresh  by  critical  investigation. 

Three  questions  in  regard  to  each  book :  1,  Authorship ; 
2.  Integrity ;  3,  Structure  and  Eolations. 

1.  Authorship. — By  whom  written? — not  an  idle  question — 
gives  us  date,  place  and  reason  why  written  ;  suggests  a  mea- 
sure of  a  book's  trustworthiness  and  helps  to  a  just  comprehen- 
sion of  it.  Ascertained  :  (1)  By  direct  statements  :  book  claims 
its  author,  e.g.  Pentateuch,  Deut.  31 :  24, — many  Psalms,  Song 
of  Solomon,  some  of  the  prophets — sometimes  author  in  first 
person,  as,  "  I,  Daniel."  (2)  Incidental  evidence,  Eccl.  1:  1. 
Joshua,  "When  we  crossed  the  Jordan,"  Many  of  Psalms 
could  only  have  been  written  by  David.  (3)  Testimony  of  other 
writers  (0.  T.)  Joshua  ascribes  Pentateuch  to  Moses,  Josh.  1 : 
7.  Isaiah  referred  to,  2  Chron.  26  :  22  and  32  :  32.  Jer.  26  :  18, 
quotes  Micah. — Ezra  refers  to  Jeremiah.   (4)  Our  Lord  and  N.  T. 

(5)  Current  tradition — this  too  remote  to  be  of  conclusive  value. 

(6)  Other  indications;  internal  evidence  may  agree  with  reputed 
origin ;  compare  Egyptian  words  in  Pentateuch,  Chaldee  pas- 
sages in  Dan.  (Exile),  Chron.  closing  with  same  sentence  with 
which  Ezra  opens,  favors  opinion  that  Ezra  is  its  author.  The 
question  of  authorship  closely  bears  upon  that  of  canonicity ;  if 
written  by  a  man  of  known  inspiration,  the  book  is  likely  to  be 
canonical, — the  converse  not  true, — if  anonymous,  it  is  not, 
therefore,  uncanonical.  It  is  sufficient  that  the  whole  book  was 
accepted  as  true  by  those  who  did  know  its  authorship,  and  that 
it  has  the  sanction  of  our  Lord.  If  it  could  be  shown  that  the 
book  was  not  written  by  its  reputed  author,  it  would  disprove 
its  canonicity ;  but  no  book  of  0.  T.  sanctioned  by  our  Lord 
can  be  so  proved. 

2.  Integrity. — The  freedom  of  a  book  from  mutilations, 
adulterations  or  additions.  Have  we  the  identical  book  which 
the  author  wrote  ?  To  decide  this,  is  the  function  of  criticism, 
which  asks :     Are  these  books  the  genuine  productions  of  their 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  5 

authors  ?  This  work  of  purification  is  not  arbitrary,  but  a 
sober  discussion  and  the  ofispring  of  a  reverent  regard  for  the 
0.  T.  writings.  We  deal  especially  with  a  priori  criticism  as 
vs.  a  posteriori,  which  belongs  to  General  Introduction  and 
which  seelis,  by  a  comparison  of  MSS.  versions,  &c.,  the  true 
text.  But  a  priori  criticism  goes  behind  this  comparison,  and 
finds  arguments  for  genuineness  in  the  passages  themselves. 
It  asks :  1.  Is  there  any  anachronism,  words  used  which  did 
not  arise  till  later?  2.  Is  there  anything  here  at  variance 
with  the  known  views  or  style  of  author?  3.  Or  anything 
which  is  contrary  to  its  position  in  the  book  ?  Does  it  agree 
with  context,  or  break  sense  or  argument  ?  If  so,  it  is  spurious. 
There  is  no  objection  to  the  impartial  application  of  these 
critical  rules ;  but  we  do  object  to  it  as  a  covert  for  infidelity. 
False  canons  have  been  set  up,  every  prophecy  has  been  called 
an  anachronism,  every  miracle,  an  interpolation  or  mistake. 
And  these  objections,  bolstered  up  by  arguments  from  language 
and  style. 

It  is  unreasonable  to  demand  that  every  separate  paragraph 
should  be  proved  internally  to  be  genuine.  Where  all  the 
external  evidence  is  for  the  genuineness  of  a  passage,  the 
burden  of  proof  rests  with  the  objectors.  Passages  in  all 
literature,  that,  a  priori,  could  not  be  established,  if  omitted, 
could  not  be  missed,  nor  replaced  by  an  a  priori  method.  A 
priori  and  a  'posteriori  criticisms  have  been  called  Eational  and 
Mechanical,  (this  term  unfortunate,  as  much  rational  work 
comes  in  mechanical  criticisms,  e.  g.,  judging  MSS.)  Internal 
and  External,  Higher  and  Lower,  Book  and  Word  criticism. 

3.  Relation  and  Structure. — Each  book,  though  complete, 
is  a  single  member  of  the  entire  literature  of  the  0.  T.,  and 
must  be  viewed  in  its  relation  to  antecedent  and  subsequent 
productions ;  what  are  the  points  of  its  connection  with  these, 
and  what  its  function  in  the  general  scheme  of  the  0.  T.  ? 
Structure  of  a  book  concerns  its  design  and  plan,  revealing  its 
inner  harmony  and  the  connection. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 


OLD   TESTAMENT. 

Considerations  in  regard  to  the  0.  T.  as  such^should  General 
or  Special  precede  ?  Some  recent  writers  insist  that  Special 
should  precede  General  0.  T.  literature ;  because  this  is  the 
historical  order — books  being  written  before  the  volume  was 
compiled.  But  the  other  method  is  more  convenient ;  more 
natural  to  ask  about  a  volume  as  a  whole,  before  the  parts. 

The  literature  of  S.  S.  divided  into  literature  of  0.  and  N. 
T.  This  division  enters  into  General  Introduction,  because  the 
two  testaments  are  distinct  in  their  origin  and  in  formation  of 
canon,  and  are  diflferent  in  language.  This  division  belongs 
also  to  Special  Introduction,  because  of  the  real  internal  differ- 
ences between  them.  We  must  now  inquire  into  the  relation 
of  the  0.  to  the  N.  T.  The  Bible  is  a  unit  in  so  far  as  it  con- 
tains the  one  self-consistent  and  complete  revelation  of  God's 
will.  Its  unity  is  not  that  of  a  uniform  mass,  but  of  an  organ- 
ized body,  whose  parts  differ  in  character  and  function,  yet 
mutually  complete  each  other  and  contribute  to  one  end.  The 
O.  and  N.  T.  agree :  1.  In  their  plenary  inspiration.  2.  In 
containing  essentially  the  same  system  of  religious  doctrine  and 
duty— Acts  26  :  22 ;  Rom.  3:21;  Gal.  3  :  14. 

The  two  testaments  differ — 1.  In  externals  :  (1)  Language — 
0.  T.  in  language  of  single  people ;  N.  T.  in  generally  spoken 
language.  (2)  Length  of  time  occupied  in  their  composition — 
0.  T.  1000  years,  from  Moses  to  Malachi ;  N.  T.  written  in 
lifetime  of  one  generation,  50  years.  (3)  In  the  period  to 
which  they  belong— 0.  T.  before,  N.  T.  after  Christ.  They 
differ — 2.  In  internals  :  (1)  0.  T.  progressive ;  varieties  in  N. 
T.  from  the  personality  of  different  writers,  but  not  progressive 
advance.  (2)  The  0.  T.  has  only  an  inchoate  or  partial  reve- 
lation, as  compared  with  N.  T.  This  inspiration  is  not  incon- 
sistent with  its  plenary  inspiration  and  is  not  derogatory, 
because  it  perfectly  answered  the  end  for  which  it  was  designed. 
The  only  inferiority  of  0.  T.  is  such  as  belongs  to  all  the  works 
of  God  which  require  time  for  their  completion.     That  the  0. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  7 

T.  was  thus  incomplete  is  sliown  :  (a)  By  hints  in  0.  T.,  Jer. 
31:31;  (6)  declaration  of  the  N.  T.,  "shadow,"  Heb.  10:1, 
Coll.  2  :  17 ;  "  weak  and  beggarly  elements,"  Gal.  4:9;  N.  T., 
"more  glorious,"  2  Cor.  3:  6-11;  Epistle  to  Heb.,  passim. 
Such  being  the  differences,  what  is  the  precise  relation  of  the  0. 
and  N.  T.  ?  Different  views  :  1.  Some  hold  no  relation  beyond 
that  of  priority  of  time  ;  that  the  New  supersedes  and  does  away 
with  the  0.  T.,  revealing  a  new  religion.  Thus,  the  Mani- 
chseans,  who  held  that  Christianity  was  directly  antagonistic  to 
Judaism.  So  some  modern  rationalists,  that  the  N.  T.  is 
entirely  a  new  system,  and  quotes  from  the  0.  T.  merely  to 
accommodate  Jewish  prejudice.  2.  Some  modern  religious 
philosophers  assert  a  relation  between  Judaism  and  Christian- 
ity— the  former  as  preparatory  to  the  latter,  but  only  as 
co-ordinate  and  equal  to  the  other  ancient  religions  which,  like 
it,  contain  elements  of  truth.  No  view  is  right,  which  ignores 
the  divinity  of  the  0.  T.  and  puts  on  a  par  God's  and  man's 
religions.  Heathenism,  in  preparation  for  Christ,  negative, 
teaching  the  inadequacy  of  all  human  systems.  Judaism,  a 
positive,  conscious  preparation,  declaring  the  true  plan  of 
salvation  and  pointing  forward  to  a  fuller  revelation.  That  the 
gospels  found  more  converts  from  heathenism  than  from  Jews, 
shows  that  they  had  less  to  rely  upon  in  their  religion,  and  im- 
plies the  more  positive  nature  of  Judaism.  3.  Others  identify 
both  testaments,  starting  from  the  truth  of  their  ultimate  connec- 
tion, they  virtually  obliterate  all  differences.  They  deny  that  the 
0.  T.  was  inchoate  or  incomplete.  The  allegorizers  found  all 
N.  T.  teaching  in  the  0.  T.  Ultra  typologists  in  modern  times 
attempt  the  same  thing.  4.  True  view — Mean  between  the 
last  two  views  :  The  0.  T.  must  be  neither  unduly  depreciated 
nor  exalted.  They  are  different  economies  or  dispensations  of 
the  same  scheme  of  grace.  0.  T.  less  clear  and  full,  giving  in 
shadow  and  type,  what  the  N.  T.  more  clearly  reveals.  The 
great  fact  which  divides  them,  is  the  Advent  of  Christ.  The 
one  is  prospective,  the  other  retrospective  of  it.  All  that  con- 
cerns the  plan  of  redemption,  therefore,  is  purposely  left  imper- 
fect, till  the  condition  necessary  to  understand  it  was  present, 


8  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

viz.,  the  advent.  But  such  truths,  as  the  Infinitude  and  Holi- 
ness of  God,  man's  fall  and  all  extra-redemptive  truths  are  set 
forth  in  the  0.  T.  with  equal  distinctness  from  the  first;  while 
the  person  of  the  Redeemer  and  all  redemptive  truth,  together 
with  their  dependent  doctrines  were  progressive  and  but  dimly 
and  gradually  revealed. 

Distinction  between  0.  and  N.  T.  is  relative,  not  absolute. 
The  two  may  be  variously  contrasted.  They  contain  the  same 
religion — the  difference  lying  in  the  mode  of  administration : 
1.  The  0.  T.  is  a  dispensation  of  law,  the  N.  T.  of  gospel.  God 
was  ready  to  save  before  Christ,  and  the  moral  law  is  still  in 
force,  but  these  were  the  prominent  features  of  the  two  dispen- 
sations. Therefore  2  Cor.  2  :  7,  speaks  of  the  former  as  "  minis- 
tration of  death,"  and  the  present  dispensation  as  "  ministration 
of  the  spirit."  So  John  1 :  17,  "  Law  by  Moses,"  &c.  2.  0.  T. 
was  ritual  and  outward,  as  vs.  the  more  spiritual  character  of 
the  N.  T.  This,  too,  is  a  relative  distinction.  Gospel  rites  now, 
and  religion  of  the  heart  then,  required ;  but  the  pomps  and  rites 
of  Judaism  are  in  contrast  to  the  more  simple  worship  of  N.  T. 
3.  The  N.  T.  was  a  dispensation  of  the  Spirit.  Holy  Spirit 
was  not  given  until  Jesus  was  glorified,  Isaiah  63 :  10 ;  Ps. 
51 :  11-12;  even  Gen.  6  :  3,  indeed,  speaks  of  a  previous  par- 
tial dispensation,  but  the  extent  and  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit's 
operations  were  limited  and  inferior  to  what  they  have  been 
since  Pentecost,  John  16 :  7.  4.  0.  T.  time  of  bondage,  N.  T. 
■of  freedom,  and  fuller  sense  of  Sonship.  Church  not  only  in 
bondage,  but  individual  seekers  could  not  attain  to  so  high  a 
degree  of  fellowship  with  God.  Gal.  4  :  2-3.  5.  0.  T.  dispen- 
sation restricted  to  one  people,  N.  T,  confined  to  no  nation — 
universal.  Proselytes  from  other  nations  submitting  to  the 
prescriptions  of  Judaism,  show  it  to  be  only  a  temporary  limi- 
tation, to  a  final  universal  dispensation.  Gal.  3  :  28.  If  the 
0.  T.  is  inferior  to  the  N.  T.,  is  it  still  binding  on  us  ?  Ans. 
Its  ceremonial  and  political  institutions,  being  temporary  and 
preparatory,  are  now  done  away.  Shown:  1.  prophetic  intima- 
mations,  "  ark  of  covenant  shall  be  forgotten,"  Jer.  3  :  16 ; 
"Gentiles  will  be  taken  as  Levites,"  Is.  66 :  21 ;  19:  19,  Mai. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  9 

1 :  11.  2.  Declarations  of  N.  T.  Compare  Peter's  vision,  Acts 
9,  with  Acts  15;  "law  as  schoolmaster,"  Gal.  3:  24-25;  5: 
1-2;  Peter  rebuked,  Gal.  2:  11-21 ;  Ileb.  throughout.  3.  The 
divinely  sanctioned  example  of  the  Apostles  and  early  Church, 
Peter,  Paul,  Acts  10  :  28  ;  15  :  3  ;  18  :  18  ;  21 :  26 ;  Gal.  2  :  3. 
4.  God's  providence  has  abolished  the  Jewish  ritual  and  state, 
temple  destroyed,  nation  scattered,  the  genealogies  lost,  Levites 
and  house  of  David  can  be  no  longer  recognized.  But  as  a 
revelation  of  God,  the  0.  T.  is  of  perpetual  validity,  notwith- 
standing the  abolishment  of  its  rites  and  theocratic  institutions: 

1.  From  repeated  declarations  of  our  Lord  and  Apostles,  Matt. 
5:17;  John  5  :  39 ;  Rom.  15  :  4 ;  2  Tim.  3  :  16  :  1  Peter  1 :  19. 

2.  Contains  laws  which  are  unchangeable,  based  on  the  nature 
of  God,  nature  of  man  and  their  relations.  3.  Ceremonial 
itself  still  valid  as  an  emblem  of  Christ,  The  0.  T.,  therefore, 
remains  forever,  one  of  the  means  God  uses  to  reveal  Christ. 
Two  modes  of  regarding  it :  (1)  As  to  its  value  and  meaning 
to  the  Jews.  (2)  As  to  its  full  meaning  intended  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  for  us  who  have  the  disclosures  of  the  N.  T. 


TYPICAL   CHARACTER   OF   O.  T. 

The  0.  T.  is  a  preparation  for  the  N.  T.,  and  that  not  as 
co-ordinate  with  heathen  religions  or  negatively  and  unconsci- 
ously, but  positively  and  consciously,  shaped  with  reference  to 
this  end  by  God.  A  scheme  of  instruction,  designed  to  pre- 
pare for  further  information,  might  be  made,  either  1.  directly 
preparative  with  statements  about  things  to  be  more  fully  dis- 
closed ;  or,  2.  indirectly  preparative  by  laying  the  ground-work 
to  be  built  upon — principles  and  ideas  which  are  preliminary 
and  fundamental  to  the  understanding  of  the  great  objects  of 
the  future.  The  mind,  if  familiarized  with  these,  will  under- 
stand the  revelations  to  come.  Both  these  ways  are,  in  fact, 
used.     The  first,  mostly  in  the  prophecies,  second,  in  types. 

Types. — The  word  occurs  only  in  the  margin,  (A.  V.)  1  Cor. 
10 :  11 ;  but  the  Greek  ro/TOc  from  TO~Tio  is  of  frequent  occur- 

2 


10  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

rence — equals  :  1.  a  mark,  as  produced  by  a  blow,  "  print  of  the 
nails,"  John  20  :  25.  2.  pattern,  as  the  mark  is  like  the  object 
which  produces  it,  "  pattern  in  the  mount,"  Heb,  8  :  5 ;  1  Tim. 
4  :  12 ;  1  Pet.  5:3.  3.  image  or  form,  Acts  7  :  43  ;  23  :  25. 
4.  technical  sense,  prejlguration,  as  Adam  of  Christ,  Rom.  5: 
14;  and  ensamples,  1  Cor.  10:  6,  11.  Types  may  be  fashioned 
in  conformity  with  the  objects  prefigured,  or  the  reverse.  The 
O.  T.  types  were  of  former  class,  receiving  their  shape  from 
Christ  to  come.  The  N.  T.  of  latter  class,  as  Christ  prefigures 
in  his  own  person  future  character  and  condition  of  his  people. 
But  TUT^oi  is  never  in  N.  T.  in  this  latter  sense.  Antitype — 
the  thing  prefigured,  1  Pet.  3  :  21. 

Type  and  Symbol. — A  symbol  is  a  sensible  sign  or  repre- 
sentation of  some  great  truth,  and  when  it  is  a  natural,  not  an 
arbitrary,  or  conventional  one,  it  is  founded  on  resemblance  to 
the  object  represented.  Letters  e.  g.,  are  arbitrary  symbols. 
Types  differ  from  symbols  in  that  they  have  reference  to  the 
future.  When  a  symbol  represents  an  idea  afterward  to  be 
realized  in  a  higher  form,  it  becomes  a  type.  Types,  therefore, 
are  prophetic  symbols ;  and  it  is  in  this  symbolical  character, 
that  the  typical  resemblance  resides.  Thus  sacrifices  were 
symbolic  of  the  great  truth  that  ''  without  shedding  of  blood 
is  no  remission,"  but  they  were,  also,  types  of  that  great  sacri- 
fice by  which  remission  was  possible.  This  truth,  symbolized, 
was  to  be  realized  in  the  future,  in  a  grander  form  than  in  0. 
T.  dispensation.  So  we  speak  of  the  type  of  a  great  coming 
event,  the  symbol  of  a  great  truth.  Tabernacle  symbolized 
that  God  was  dwelling  among  His  people ;  but  was  a  type,  in 
that  this  truth  was  to  have  a  future  realization  in  Christ,  and 
in  the  Church,  as  kingdom  of  God  on  earth  and  in  its  final 
consummation  in  heaven.  Tabernacle  and  temple,  therefore, 
symbols  of  spiritual  truth — types  of  grand  events  in  which 
that  truth  found  its  exemplification.  An  allegory  is  a  similitude, 
in  which  moral  or  spiritual  truth  is  conveyed  by  a  fictitious 
narrative  and  imaginary  persons  or  things.  Truth  of  allegory 
lies  in  its  spiritual  significance ;  while  type  is  as  real  and  true 
literally,  as  its  antitype,  e.  g.,  "  Pilgrim's  Progress,"  allegory ; 
Canaan  and  David,  types. 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  11 

Discrimination  between  typical  and  allegorical  interpreta- 
tions :  allegorical  interpretation  of  0.  T.  either  denies,  or  makes 
no  account  of  the  literal  and  historical  occurrences  of  what  is 
recorded,  regarding  them  as  a  sign  of  the  truth. 

The  narrative  of  0.  T.  is  not  a  record  of  facts,  but  the  veil 
of  spiritual  truths.  The  aim  of  allegorical  interpretation  was 
to  do  away  with  parts  of  0.  T,  which  seemed  unworthy  of 
revelation  ;  held  by  Origen  and  others.  Typical  interpretation 
insists  on  literality  of  facts  as  if  there  were  no  other  meaning; 
but  at  the  same  time  they  are  regarded  as  prefigurations  of 
certain  spiritual  truths,  to  find  a  higher  realization.  Old  alle- 
gorical method  is  to  be  distinguished  from  modern  mythical 
and  legendary.  They  agree  in  undervaluing  the  literal  truth 
of  scripture  narrative.  The  Tnyth  may  be  defined  as  an  idea 
compacted  into  the  form  of  a  history. 

The  legend  is  a  history  whose  form  has  been  controlled  and 
moulded  by  an  idea.  In  both  myth  and  legend,  abstract  ideas 
assume  concrete  forms ;  and  this  assumption  of  forms  is  done, 
not  by  conscious  intelligent  selection,  as  in  allegory,  but  in 
gradual  and  inseparable  blending.  These  different  modes  of 
interpretation  differ,  also,  in  other  important  respects :  all 
explain  away  some  real  truths  and  accept  others.  Mythical 
and  legendary  make  the  narrative  the  form  of  popular  notions, 
often  neither  scriptural  nor  true,  and  their  aim  is  to  expunge 
divinity  of  O.  T.  But  while  0.  T.  abounds  in  types,  its  divine 
reality  precludes  allegories,  except  when  given  as  such. 

That  types  existed  is  proved :  1.  Express  statements  of 
sacred  writers,  declaring  objects  in  0.  T.  to  be  prefigurations 
of  Christ,  viz:  references  to  Psalms  in  N.  T.,  Eph.  to  Heb. 
2.  Numerous  and  striking  resemblances  in  objects  of  0.  T.  to 
truths  and  facts  of  N.  T. ;  although  many  fanciful  analogies, 
this  does  not  affect  the  above  fact.  The  likenesses  are  too 
many  to  be  casual  and  penetrate  into  the  very  nature  of  the 
objects.  God  must  have  intended  them  to  be  types.  3.  Analo- 
gies in  nature.  God's  ordinary  method  in  nature  is  that  of 
types.  Every  stage  in  growth  predicts  the  future;  the  seed 
contains  the  germ  in  undeveloped  form,  in  type.    Infancy  points 


12  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

to  manhood.  All  nature  is  formed  according  to  a  law  of  typical 
progression.  Manifest  structure  of  development  according  to 
type  all  through  geological  records.  Dr.  McCosh,  in  "  Typical 
Forms  :  "  "  Geology  reveals  a  typical  system.  Lower  animals 
are  prognostications  of  future  ones.  There  is  an  order  succes- 
sive in  nature ;  but  as  one  plant  does  not  produce  its  neighbor 
plant,  so  the  plants  of  one  epoch  do  not  produce  those  of 
another."  Hence  nothing  singular  in  existence  of  types  in  0.  T. 
4.  From  relation  of  0.  T.  to  N.  T. ;  same  scheme,  0.  T.  prepara- 
tory ;  N.  T.  its  completement.  There  must  be  links  of  connec- 
tion, these  are  types.  The  former  must  contain  simpler  and 
primitive  ideas  which  await  a  fuller  disclosure.  5.  Permanent 
factors  in  this  scheme.  There  are  certain  permanent  factors  in 
God's  revelation  which  give  it  a  fixed  character  for  all  time, 
and  which  bring  about  the  incessant  repetition  of  like  forms 
and  thus  furnish  types.  The  three  main  factors  are  :  (1) 
Nature  of  man;  (2)  God's  character;  (3)  God's  gracious 
purpose  of  salvation.  Thus  even  in  Adam's  family,  we  find  in 
type  two  great  classes  which  still  exist:  Cain  vs.  Abel,  1  Jno. 
3:12;  so  Gal.  4 :  29,  Ishmael  vs.  Isaac.  Also,  God  changes 
not,  and  what  he  has  once  done  he  will,  in  like  circumstances, 
do  again,  therefore,  every  act  of  his  is  typical.  6.  The  purpose 
of  this  scheme  of  divine  grace,  as  far  as  related  to  people  of  0. 
T.,  demanded  existence  of  types.  The  0.  T.  had  an  immediate 
end  to  answer,  viz.:  to  effect  the  salvation  of  those  then  on 
the  earth.  This  it  could  only  do  by  showing  forth  some 
truths  and  lessons  which  are  now  connected  with  salvation. 
The  way  by  which  sinners  have  returned  to  God  has  ever 
been  the  same.  Therefore,  if  the  0.  T.  was  to  accomplish 
its  mission,  its  lessons,  however  dim,  must  be  the  lessons, 
substantially,  of  the  gospel — hence  types.  7.  The  applicability 
of  this  scheme  of  gracious  training  for  the  generations  in  the 
period  of  transition  between  0.  T.  and  N.  T.,  made  types  neces- 
sary. Men  must  be  prepared  to  receive  Christ.  Israel  trained 
by  exhibiting  these  ideas  again  and  again  typically.  As 
long  as  the  great  objects  of  salvation  were  not  seen,  their 
place  must  be  filled  by  patterns.     The  present  value  of  the  0. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  13 

T.  is  due  to  the  fact  that  under  evanescent -forms,  it  presents 
abiding  truths. 


THE   EXTENT   OF   TYPES. 

To  what  extent  are  types  used  ?  By  what  criteria  can  they 
be  ascertained  and  identified?  Nothing  in  scriptural  interpre- 
tation has  suffered  more  from  fancies.  The  Fathers  generally 
were  allegorizers — allegory,  however,  used  in  wide  sense, 
including  types  as  well  as  allegory,  Gal.  4  :  2'L  Starting  with 
the  conviction  that  N.  T.  was  foreshadowed  in  0.  T.,  they  laid 
down  no  general  theory,  but  were  content  with  such  particulars 
as  fell  in  their  way,  as  if  anything  in  the  O.  T.  might  signify 
anything  in  N.  T.  Hence,  while  their  christian  instinct  led 
them  largely  right,  their  fancy  led  them  largely  wrong.  Thus 
the  scarlet  cord  of  Rahab  prefigured  blood  of  Christ ;  4  lepers 
at  Samaria,  4  Evangelists;  12  oxen  of  Elijah,  12  Apostles;  love 
of  David  for  Bathsheba,  that  of  Christ  for  Church.  Reformers 
recalled  attention  to  the  strict  historical  sense,  discriminating 
between  type  and  allegory,  refusing  allegory  as  basis  of  doctrine. 
Types  were  allowed  and  largely  studied,  especially  by  John 
Cocceius,  of  Holland,  who,  however,  went  to  great  extremes, 
often  whimsical.  "  Cur  Christus  Quadratus  f  "  growing  out 
of  square  form  of  altar,  thought  to  typify  Christ.  All  these 
errors  due  to  two  causes  :  1.  Attended  too  exclusively  to  details, 
instead  of  seeking  the  underlying  idea.  2.  Did  not  reach  a 
clear  idea  of  what  constituted  the  typical  relation.  This  led 
to  a  multitude  of  unimportant  resemblances.  Certainty  and 
clearness  grew  out  of  conflicting  and  discordant  views.  Palpa- 
ble incongruities  brought  the  doctrine  of  types  into  disrepute 
and  led  to  opposite  error:  1.  Types  rejected.  2.  Others  not 
prepared  for  this,  claimed  only  those  types  to  be  admitted 
which  the  Bible  declared  to  be  such.  Bishop  Marsh:  "admit 
only  those  especially  declared  to  be  types  in  N.  T.  Types  involve 
divine  intent,  therefore  God  must  tell  what  he  intends.  We  are 
in  danger  of  making  typical  what  God  did  not  so  design."    But, 


14  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

(1)  This  would  be'desirable,  i.  e.,  to  have  an  explicit  declaration, 
e.  g.,  if  the  conversation  on  the  road  to  Emmaus  were  recorded, 
it  would  have  been  of  great  value,  but  where  is  there  such  a 
professed  revelation  of  types,  as  to  warrant  the  assertion  that 
none  other  existed  ?  (2)  Types  are  referred  to  in  the  most 
casual  and  incidental  way,  and  those  thus  mentioned  have 
nothing  in  common  as  distinguished  from  other  objects  of  0.  T. 
to  account  for  these  alone  being  types.  (3)  Upon  this  view, 
Typology  loses  all  its  importance  and  design  ;  reduced  to  a  mere 
enumeration  of  so  many  instances  of  Divine  fore-knowledge; 
no  preparation  for  coming  of  Christ.  (4)  This  hypothesis  of 
Bishop  Marsh  assumes  that  the  Divine  intention  in  this  matter, 
can  be  disclosed,  only  by  express  and  individual  statements ; 
unfounded  assumption.  As  well  say  the  predictions  concerning 
Christ  were  not  such,  because  not  declared  fulfilled  in  N.  T. 
(5)  Destroys  the  meaning  and  value  of  much  of  the  0.  T. 
3.  In  order  to  escape  these  difficulties,  others  say  :  there  are 
t^o  kinds  of  types,  or  two  grounds  by  which  they  can  be  dis- 
tinguished, Ti/piinnati  a.nd  Typiillati:  Innati — those  declared 
to  be  such  by  scripture.  Illati — those  whose  typical  character 
is  directly  deducible  from  the  innati;  serviceable  as  a  trans- 
ition, but  unsatisfactory :  (1)  admits  more  types,  and  (2)  con- 
fesses underlying  principles;    but  (1)    still  matter  of  details. 

(2)  resting  on  mere  authority,  with  no  thorough  investigation 
of  its  rational  basis. 

True  View. — This  principle  was  first  announced  by  Bengel, 
and  is,  that  individual  objects  under  0.  T.  derive  their  charac- 
ter and  true  significance  from  the  system  in  which  they  are 
found,  and  are,  therefore,  to  be  studied  with  reference  to  their 
position  in  God's  great  plan.  The  character  of  individual 
objects,  determined  by  the  entire  scheme.  The  whole  prepara- 
tory and  prefigurative.  This  view,  self-evincing,  also  proved 
from  scripture  :  1.  By  practice  of  the  sacred  writers.  Inspira- 
tion safest  guide.  If  from  the  methods  used  by  Christ,  true 
inductions  can  give  us  this  general  principle,  it  is  as  true  as  if 
it  were  expressly  stated.  The  inspired  expositions  are  not 
dicta,   but  hints   for  our  guidance  from   which  we  ascertain 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  15 

principles.  2.  The  result  thus  reached  by  induction  is  fur- 
ther confirmed  by  comprehensive  statements  of  scripture : 
" Shadow,"  Heb.  10  :  1 ;  "law, schoolmaster," Gal.  3  :  24 ;  "  Law," 
Gal.  4  :  1-5  ;  if  the  law  is  such,  all  pertaining  to  it  must  partake 
of  the  same  character.  As  to  the  history  of  the  0.  T.  as  well 
as  ceremonies,  1  Cor.  10  :  II,  "  ensamples,"  and  E,om.  15:4.  3. 
Actual  resemblances  between  objects  of  two  Testaments.  Every- 
thing in  0.  T.  has  its  plan  and  function  in  the  general  work  of 
preparation  for  N.  T.  We  are  to  discover  that  particular 
function  which  will  show  us  its  typical  bearing.  The  existence 
of  a  pervading  system  of  analogies,  shows  that  we  are  dealing 
with  what  is  designed,  and  that  by  God;  casual  resemblance 
would  not  show  this,  but  the  general  unity  of  plan  and  amount 
of  resemblances  between  the  two  Testaments  do. 


SCHEME  OF  O.  T.  TYPES. 

Distribution  and  how  governed.  0.  T.  has  two  chief  functions, 
one  present  and  one  prospective.  The  former  was  to  lead  tlie 
then  existing  generations  to  God,  latter  to  prepare  for  N.  T. 
These  two  ends,  though  distinct,  not  separate  in  point  of  fact, 
so  that  some  parts  of  0.  T.  would  have  special  reference  to  the 
present,  and  others  would  be  prospective.  But  the  aim  of  the 
0.  T.  for  the  present  was  the  same  as  for  the  future ;  the  setting 
forth  of  the  gospel  in  embryo  was  needed  for  that  specific  gen- 
eration, at  the  same  time  prepared  way  for  N.  T.  Everytliing 
in  it  partakes  of  this  preparatory  character.  On  examination 
of  0.  T.  we  discover  two  lines  of  preparation ;  by  utterances 
and  objects. 


1       Vfirl-inl       /Direot-rrr.phPGy. 
i..      V  ex  Uctl,     \  Indirect— Duclriiie. 

f  T        1     I  Ritual. 

2.  Eeal— Types,   i  „i,^„,i,,i_|}^^r...s  p,,^«„. 


1.  Verhal.—{1)  Direct  and  explicit;  (2)  indirect  and  implicit; 
according  as  utterances  have  an  immediate  or  mediate  reference 
to  future  objects.     Direct  preparation  is  the  work  of  prophecy, 


16  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

includes  all  that  is  exclusively  Messianic.  Indirect  preparation 
is  found  in  all  other  utterances  of  0.  T.,  all  its  teachings, 
doctrines,  &c. ;  not  full  revelation  of  doctrine,  but  outlines, 
germs,  suggestions. 

2.  Real. — Preparation  (accomplished  by  things),  is  the  func- 
tion of  types  which  comprise  every  object  belonging  to  the  former 
dispensation,  and  with  the  words  embrace  the  whole  0.  T. 
Types  :  (1)  Legal,  or  (2)  historical.  The  legal  owe  existence 
to  divine  enactment — (a)  ritual  or  ceremonial,  connected  with 
divine  worship ;  (6)  civil  or  theocratic,  belonging  to  the  state. 
Historical  types  are  such  as  come  into  being  in  the  course  of 
history ;  persons  or  events — either  divine  events,  wrought  by 
God,  or  human.  The  utterances  and  objects  constitute  together 
the  whole  0.  T.  as  a  scheme  of  gracious  instruction.  Each  has 
its  lesson,  secured  in  each  case  by  the  fact  that  all  either 
originated  from  God — shaped  or  controlled  by  Him.  This  sug- 
gests two  modes  by  which  the  0.  T.  instruction  was  conducted 
All  has  either,  1.  proceeded  from  revealing  Spirit ;  or,  2.  been 
guided  by  Superintending  Providence.  It  is  palpable  that  what 
is  wholly  from  God  will  answer  perfectly  its  end ;  from  man, 
will  have  the  admixture  of  human  frailty  and  fail  in  its  ideal 
and  antitype.  The  human  part  of  historical  types  is  under 
God's  providential  control.  They  are  in  this  way  made  to  fulfill 
His  purpose  and  teach  His  lessons.  But  they  belong  to  the 
sphere  of  human  freedom.  In  so  far  as  men  conform  to  God's 
will,  they  identify  themselves  with  His  scheme  of  grace.  But 
when  they  transgress  the  will  of  God,  violate  the  fundamental 
law  of  0.  T.,  renounce  its  spirit,  separate  themselves  from  it, 
the  predictive  power  is  obscured.  Thus  Moses,  interceding,  is 
an  emblem  of  Christ,  but  not  when  he  spake  unadvisedly.  So 
Aaron  in  sacrificing;  not  in  case  of  golden  calf.  Solomon,  in 
rearing  temple ;  not  in  his  idolatry.  Sampson,  in  his  war  vs. 
the  Philistines;  not  in  his  connection  with  Delilah.  Not  Ahaz's 
and  Manasseh's  anti-theocratic  reigns,  but  David's  and  Asa's. 
What  stands  opposed  to  the  spirit  of  0.  T.  does  not  belong  to  it  as 
a  divine  scheme,  but  to  man's  wickedness.  Sins  are  but  types  of 
corruption  and  the  kingdom  of  darkness.     These  human  types 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  17 

are,  nevertheless,  recorded  for  us  in  the  inspired  Word,  and,  so 
far,  are  brought  under  control  of  the  spirit  of  revelation.  As 
types,  they  are  just  as  they  are  recorded  ;  what  is  insignificant, 
is  left  in  the  back  ground,  what  is  typical,  is  made  prominent, 
e.  g.,  bondage  in  Egypt,  few  chapters — emancipation,  many. 
Because  latter  had  detailed  spiritual  significance.  The  very 
omissions,  significant.  Apostle  lays  stress  upon  omissions  as 
well  as  assertions,  e.  g.,  Melchizedek,  "  without  father  and 
mother,"  Heb,  7 :  3.  Legal  types  belong  to  the  domain  of  the 
divine  and  human  ;  as  instituted  of  God,  perfect;  as  performed 
by  man,  imperfect.  Thus  the  ceremonial  was  of  divine  ordain- 
ing, theocratic  dignities  of  divine  appointment,  therefore  infalli- 
bly prognostic;  but,  as  they  were  carried  out  by  fallible  men, 
they  failed  of  their  antitype.  The  rest  of  the  preparatory 
scheme,  divine  utterances  and  acts  came  right  from  God,  and 
are,  therefore,  perfect  types. 

Interpretation  of  Types. — Of  what  objects  in  N.  T.  are 
the  0.  T.  types  typical  ?  How  is  the  proper  significance  of 
each  type  to  be  attained  ?  If  types  have  any  value,  they  must 
have  a  distinct  and  settled  meaning.  Need  of  fixed  principles. 
Type  does  not  directly  represent  its  antitype ;  but  through  the 
medium  of  a  common  idea  embodied  in  both.  Mere  points  of 
likeness  do  not  constitute  a  type.  Twelve  stones  from  Jordan 
not  typical  of  12  Apostles ;  7  blasts  of  trumpet, — 7  Epistles  of 
Paul.  Accidental,  no  common  idea  pervades  them.  Unless 
type  and  antitype  contain  same  idea,  the  former  would  convey 
no  instruction  to  those  living  under  the  0.  T.  itself. 

1.  They  had  no  means  of  knowing  the  features  of  resem- 
blance, which  are  often  so  remote  and  obscure  as  to  be  of  little 
use  if  they  were  known.  2.  Instruction  so  given  not  simple, 
but  difficult  and  perplexing,  needing  an  inspired  commentary. 
3.  With  all  the  aid  of  fulfillment,  there  is  endless  doubt  and 
disagreement  among  typologists  who  take  this  view.  (In  what 
utter  darkness  must  the  0.  T.  people  have  been).  Natural 
method  of  instruction ;  first  familiarize  with  truth  in  lower 
forms. 

Yet  features  of  external  similitude  superadded  as  indexes, 

3 


18  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

while  common  idea — essential  to  typical  reality — is  the  main 
thing.  The  points  of  extreme  likeness  may  be  added  to  lead 
to  the  recognition  of  antitype.  Thus,  Melchizedek's  official 
positions,  as  priest  and  king,  are  the  leading  feature  of  his  typi- 
calness  of  Christ.  Yet  subordinates  are  added,  as  significance 
of  name,  "King  of  righteousness," — of  kingdom,  "King  of 
peace."  Joshua,  as  leader,  type  of  "  Captain  of  our  Salvation." 
Yet  there  are  other  points  of  similitude :  correspondence  of 
names ;  both  received  divine  attestation  on  banks  of  Jordan. 
Each  class  of  types  has  a  specific  design.  The  ritual  type  set 
forth  the  restoration  of  communion  with  God,  and  the  method. 
Theocratic,  the  immediate  oversight  and  government  of  God. 
Human  types,  on  human  side  denote  the  part  to  be  played  by 
God  through  human  agency.  In  temporal  blessings,  God 
showed  what  he  would  do  for  his  people  through  the  instru- 
mentality of  men,  e.  g.,  seed  of  Abraham,  son  of  David.  On 
divine  side,  the  miracles  of  0.  T.  represent  salvation,  show 
what  Jehovah  was  prepared  to  do  in  order  to  save  his  people. 
Both  the  human  and  divine  branches  of  all  these  types  meet  in 
Christ  the  God-man.  Types  may  be  such  by  comparison  or 
contrast, — may  be  direct  and  positive,  or  inverse  and  negative. 
Every  temporal  good  foreshadows  eternal  blessings.  Evil 
events  stand  in  contrast  and  are  negatively  typical.  They 
create  a  want,  a  hunger,  which  points  forward  to  Christ  as  a 
supply.  The  same  object  in  0.  T.  may  typify  more  than  one 
object  in  N.  T.  1.  When  the  type  embodies  an  idea  destined 
to  more  than  one  realization,  which  may  repeat  itself  succes- 
sively, as  the  Exodus,  or  in  different  forms,  as  the  tabernacle 
and  temple  embody  the  truth  of  God's  dwelling  among  men. 
This  had  individual  realization  in  person  of  Christ,  universal 
earthly  realization  in  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  church,  and, 
heavenly,  when  God's  dwelling  shall  be  with  men.  Temple 
therefore  type,  (1)  of  Christ;  (2)  of  church  on  earth;  (3)  of 
heavenly  mansions. 

2.  A  type  may  have  difierent  senses  not  only  when  a  single 
idea  has  successive  or  distinct  realizations,  but  also  when  the 
type  embodies  distinct  ideas  which  are  separately  realized — the 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  19 

flood,  type  of  baptism,  1  Pet.  3  :  21,  and  type  of  final  judgment, 
2  Pet.  2  :  2-5.  So  sacrifices  have  double  typical  meaning  :  (1) 
Expiation,  by  shedding  of  blood,  typical  of  sacrifice  of  Christ ; 
(2)  idea  of  oblation  to  God,  typical  of  surrender  of  his  people 
to  him,  Kora,  12  :  1.  Belongs  to  the  nature  of  types  that  they 
should  be  imperfect,  necessarily  inferior  to  antitype.  Hence 
no  one  type  can  be  an  adequate  representation  ;  cannot  set  forth 
Christ  on  every  side,  nor  can  it  completely,  on  any  one  side, 
therefore  they  are  multiplied.  From  their  combined  and  sup- 
plementary character  we  get  a  more  adequate  amount  of  typical 
testimony,  "  tapers,  till  day  dawn." 

A  satisfactory  treatise  of  typology  would  need :  1.  An 
explanation  of  the  function  of  each  type  in  the  general  plan. 
2.  Its  relation  to  the  entire  group  of  types  which  give  the  same 
general  phase.  3.  Relation  of  each  group  to  other  groups. 
4.  The  general  resultant  of  the  whole,  and  the  total  of  the 
impressions.  Such  a  treatise  has  never  been  made.  But  it  is 
well  to  have  an  ideal.  A  type  cannot  in  all  its  parts  represent 
its  antitype.  Not  every  particular  in  a  type  significant ;  wood 
of  tabernacle,  rings  of  ark,  snuff'ers  of  candle-stick.  The  rule 
is,  the  main  part  of  the  analogy  is  to  be  seized,  and  whatever 
belongs  to  this  central  idea,  but  everything  which  conflicts  or 
distracts  or  is  far-fetched  or  trifling,  has  no  typical  significance. 
Discretion  indispensable. 


POSITION  OF  TYPES  IN  PLAN  OF  O.  T. 

The  function  especially  given  to  the  types  in  the  general 
plan  of  0.  T.  is  now  before  us.  Two  chief  lines  of  0.  T.  inter- 
pretation :  1.  Objects;  2.  Utterances.  Objects — all  types. 
Utterances — prophecies  and  doctrines.  The  latter,  partly 
independent  of  the  work  of  redemption.  These  extra-redemp- 
tive doctrines,  revealed  with  equal  clearness  from  first.  But 
the  redemptive  doctrines,  e.  g.,  Trinity,  incarnation,  suff"erings 
of  the  righteous,  everlasting  life,  &c.,  are  progressive.  In  this, 
is   the    whole  system  of  0.  T.  doctrinal   development.     The 


20  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

ceutral  doctrine  is  that  of  the  Messiah  himself,  and  the  progress 
of  divine  revelation  in  0.  T,  utterances  is  most  accurately 
determined  by  estimating  the  progress  of  Messianic  revelation. 
Therefore  we  consider  types  in  relation  to  the  one  doctrine  of 
Messiah.  Relation  of  types  to  prophecies  :  1.  Types  are  but 
implicit  predictions  concerning  Christ,  prophecies  explicit, 
awakening  a  conscious  expectation  of  his  coming  and  work. 
Types,  shadows,  do  not  necessarily  direct  the  people  to  the 
coming  substance  or  antitype.  Prophecies  in  themselves  fore- 
cast the  future.  If  understood  at  all,  must  give  information 
concerning  Christ.  But  types  have  their  own  historical  and 
legal  value  as  0.  T.  objects  in  and  of  themselves.  Further, 
the  common  idea  is  essential  to  their  setting  forth  any  other 
and  future  object.  Three  stages  in  understanding  types  :  (1) 
Purely  external,  their  literal  or  ritual  value;  (2)  Symbolical 
and  religious  truth  taught.  This,  the  types  were  intended  to 
communicate.  The  spiritual  doubtless  penetrated  into  these 
truths,  yet,  they  might  not  apprehend  ;  (3)  The  typical  mean- 
ing. Thus  while  the  formal  worshipers  in  Israel  saw  in  the 
sacrifice  nothing  but  external  ceremony,  the  pious  learned  the 
doctrine  of  expiation  and  substitution ;  and  this  preliminary 
training  was  serviceable  to  the  reception  of  Christ.  Therefore 
the  N.  T.  uses  largely  the  0.  T.  symbols  to  set  forth  who  Christ 
was  and  his  relation  to  us. 

Were  types  understood  in  0.  T.  times  ?  Difficult  to  say  how 
far.  Their  aim  was  to  familiarize  the  minds  of  the  people  with 
the  truths  common  to  both  dispensations.  Probably  difi'erent 
grades  of  knowledge  in  different  generations  and  persons. 
Many  not  known  to  be  types  or  misinterpreted.  An  inkling  of 
the  leading  types  was  possessed.  This  shown :  (1)  The  gen- 
eral knowlege  of  prospective  character  of  0.  T.  would  naturally 
be  extended  to  its  principal  objects.  (2)  The  unsatisfying 
nature  and  deficiencies  of  types  in  themselves  would  raise 
expectation  of  something  better.  Vicarious  substitution — ani- 
mal insufficient.  Something  better  needed.  (3)  Partial  inter- 
pretation furnished  by  0.  T.  itself.  Typical  character  of  Mel- 
chizedek  shown  in  Ps.  110,  Joshua,  Ps.  95,  sin  offering,  Is.  53. 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  21 

(4)  Express  statements  of  N.  T.,  Abraham  and  patriarchs, 
Heb.  11  :  16,  Canaan,  type  of  Heaven.  2.  No  relation  of 
prophecies  to  types — chronological  succession.  Types  predomi- 
nate in  the  beginning  and  prophecies  in  the  end.  This  is  in 
accordance  with  the  general  plan  of  0.  T.  that  the  obscure 
should  precede  the  more  explicit.  3.  Contemporaneous  relation 
between  types  and  prophecies,  both  in  the  mode  of  representa- 
tion and  in  the  amount  of  truth  they  convey.  Not  precise 
equality  between  them  in  all  periods.  It  is  as  great  an  error 
to  convert  prophecy  into  mere  interpretation  of  co-existing 
types  as  to  overlook  the  fact  of  the  relation  between  them. 
The  spirit  is  not  limited  in  mode  or  extent  of  revelation. 
The  revelation  by  type  and  prophecy  does  not  tally  with 
mechanical  exactness.  Yet  general  agreement.  This  corres- 
pondence due  to  the  fact  that  they  form  co-ordinate  and  con- 
nected parts  of  the  same  scheme.  Both  tended  to  same  result, 
and  the  lessons  of  each,  therefore,  had  a  substantial  agreement. 
4.  Mutual  dependence.  (1)  Prophecy  predicts  type,  temporal 
good — every  prediction  of  which  foretells  the  blessings  of 
Messiah's  reign.  Both  the  type  and  the  antitype  are  regarded 
at  once  by  the  prophet,  e.  g.,  Babylonish  captivity  and  salvation 
by  Christ.  So  every  prediction  of  the  removal  of  evil  foretells 
the  final  overthrow  of  the  kingdom  of  darkness — fall  of  Baby- 
lon, Nineveh,  &c.  (2)  When  types  suggest  form  of  prophecy. 
Not  until  in  Moses,  had  the  idea  of  mediator  been  set  forth ; 
became  then  prophecy  of  Christ,  Deut.  18  :  15.  So  David  and 
Solomon  in  Psalms;  sin  offering,  Isaiah  53.  5.  Types,  like 
prophecies  of  0.  T.  not  (1)  exclusive  relation  to  N.  T.  Some 
found  a  preliminary  fulfillment  in  the  former  dispensation,  e.  g., 
Exodus  fulfilled  in  the  deliverance  from  Babylon,  (Isaiah); 
wilderness  and  dispersion  among  Gentiles,  (Ezekiel) ;  Moses 
type  of  prophets,  (Deuteronomy);  judges  and  other  deliverers, 
(Obadiah) ;  nor  (2)  cease  with  the  close  of  N.  T. ;  whole  king- 
dom of  grace  typical  of  the  kingdom  of  glory ;  primitive  and 
universal  church,  seven  churches  in  Asia,  typical  of  the  condi- 
tion of  the  church  in  all  future  ages;  Christ,  of  his  people 
glorified.     6.  No  types  or  prophecies  in  heathen  world.     As 


22  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

there  were  no  miracles,  so,  strictly  speaking,  no  types.  All 
positive  spiritual  preparation  for  Christ  made  in  the  bosom  of 
the  Church.  Their  positive  preparation  for  Christ,  not  spiritual 
but  only  forms  of  wordly  culture — negative,  showing  the  insuf- 
ficiency of  human  systems.  Yet  blind  gropings  and  cravings  of 
the  human  heart,  for  which  Christ  the  only  adequate  satisfac- 
tion. Occasional  expressions  in  heathen  writings  and  forms  of 
thought  seem  to  stand  in  remarkable  relation  to  gospel  truth. 
Thus  the  incarnation  of  the  Hindus  shows  longing  for  God  in 
the  flesh.  Great  deliverer,  as  Hercules,  that  only  one  who  was 
both  son  of  God  and  man  could  free  men.  [See  Trench's 
"  Christ,  the  Desire  of  All  Nations"]. 


Section  VII. 

Structure  of  the  Old  Testament. 


Some  who  have  contemplated  the  Sacred  Scriptures  only  on 
the  human  side,  have  viewed  them  as  the  works  of  different 
authors,  arranged  without  regard  to  order  or  method.  This  is 
a  very  superficial  view,  even  if  they  be  regarded  only  as 
Hebrew  writings.  Considered  merely  as  the  product  of  the 
human  mind,  these  books  must  have  their  own  characteristics 
and  laws. 

Art  and  Literature  have  each  their  development  in  history. 
Hence,  on  the  hypothesis  which  regards  the  Scriptures  as  of 
human  origin,  they  must  possess  a  unity  and  a  regular  structure. 
Others,  surveying  them  from  the  divine  side,  have  merely  con- 
sidered them  as  reservoirs,  into  which  successive  communica- 
tions of  divine  truth  have  been  poured.  But  there  is  something 
more  than  this ;  the  order  and  symmetry  found  in  all  God's 
works,  would  lead  us  to  expect  the  same  order  in  His  Word. 

If,  then,  these  partial  conceptions,  taken  singly,  compel  the 
conclusion  of  a  unity  in  structure,  how  much  more  is  this  the 
case  when  they  are  combined.  Human  agents  were  employed 
in  the  production  of  the  books,  but  there  was  one  controling 
mind  guiding  and  directing  them. 

All  the  parts  are  disposed  in  harmonious  unity.  Here  is 
unity  in  multiplicity  ;  singleness  of  aim  with  diversity  of  opera- 
tion. The  Scriptures  must,  therefore,  be  one  organic  whole  ; 
all  the  parts  in  unity  with  one  another  and  with  the  entire 
volume. 

In  the  bodv  of  evidences  for  an  organic  unity,  we  shall  be 


24  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

obliged  to  classify,  or  be  lost  in  details.  Every  fact  related, 
every  institution  enacted,  every  utterance  recorded,  has  its  place 
and  function  in  the  plan  of  the  whole  work. 


AIDS   IN    CLASSIFICATION. 

1.  The  Separate  Books  of  Sceiptuee. — ^These  are  not 
arbitrary  divisions,  but  each  book  in  form,  dimensions,  and 
contents  represents  a  special  task  allotted  to  a  human  organ  by 
the  Holy  Spirit.  Thus,  Isaiah,  Ezekiel,  Malachi,  etc.,  exhibit 
that  part  of  God's  plan,  which  each  of  them  was  to  reveal. 
The  Psalms  exhibit  that  portion  of  truth  which  the  sacred 
singers  were  employed  to  communicate.  The  3  books  of  Sol. 
(Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  and  Song  of  Solomon)  have  each  a  differ- 
ent aim,  and  respectively  show  what  God  would  reveal  in  that 
particular  way.  So  every  book  has  an  individual  and  fit  char- 
acter. They  are  organic  parts  constituting  units,  with  each  a 
purpose,  and  all  taken  together  forming  one  whole. 

2.  Arrangement  of  these  Books. — Every  distribution  is 
not  a  true  classification.  The  books  of  the  Bible  are  grouped 
in  various  ways : 

A.  As  to  extraneous  matters.  For  example :  1.  The  acci- 
dents of  language.  In  this  way  the  0.  T.  would  be  distinguished 
from  N.  T.,  a  very  superficial  division,  but,  in  this  instance, 
an  index  of  a  real  separation.  Each  collection  was  in  the 
language  of  those  for  whom  it  was  intended;  the  0.  T.  in 
Hebrew,  for  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine ;  the  N.  T.  in  Greek, 
for  the  whole  civilized  world.  Again,  if  we  divide  the  0.  T. 
itself  with  respect  to  language  (viz. :  Hebrew  and  Chaldee),  it 
would  be  a  false  division.  The  Chaldee  portions  do  not  rank 
as  a  separate  class.  As  compared  with  the  rest  of  0.  T.  there 
is  no  organic  difference.  2.  The  current  division  of  Hebrew 
Bible  is  three-fold  :  The  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Kathuvim 
or  Hagiographa.  This  distribution  appears  to  rest,  not  on  the 
nature  of  the  writings  themselves,  but  on  the  official  standing  of 
their  authors.     Moses,  the  law-giver  and  mediator,  and  thus 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  25 

occupying  a  unique  position,  comes  first.  Then  follow  the 
writings  of  the  prophets,  i.  e.,  those  persons  who  were  invested 
with  the  prophetical  office.  Some  of  these  books  are  historical 
and  others  prophetical ;  but  their  position  is  due  to  the  fact 
that  their  authors  were  prophets.  Then  come  the  writings  of 
those  who,  though  inspired,  were  not  prophets  in  the  strict 
technical  sense.  Thus  Daniel,  although  he  uttered  many  strik- 
ing prophecies,  is  put  in  the  third  division.  He  was  not 
properly  a  spiritual,  but  a  civil  officer.  3.  The  books  might  be 
grouped  in  respect  to  locality.  Then  those  whose  scene  is  laid 
outside  of  Palestine  [Pentateuch;  Esther,  in  Persia;  Job,  in 
Idumea;  Ezekiel  and  Daniel,  in  Babylon;  Jonah,  in  JSlineveh ; 
etc.,]  would  form  one  division.  Again,  the  books  whose  scene 
was  laid  within  Palestine  [Joshua,  Judges,  Kuth,  Sam.,  Kings, 
David  and  Solomon,  etc.,]  would  form  the  other  division.  And 
again,  the  latter  might  be  sub-divided  into  (1)  those  books 
which  relate  to  all  the  people,  and  (2)  those  which  belong  to 
only  one  division  of  the  people ;  e.  g.,  those  referring  (a)  to 
kingdom  of  Judah,  and  (6)  to  kingdom  of  ten  tribes.  But  this 
gives  no  hint  as  to  the  true  structure  of  the  0.  T.  It  is  only  a 
geographical  distinction — a  division,  but  not  a  classification. 
4.  The  books  might  be  classified  with  respect  to  time  of  their 
composition,  i.  e.,  arranged  in  their  chronological  order.  5. 
The  books  might  be  classed  with  respect  to  diff"erences  of  style, 
e.  g.,  into  legal,  historical,  poetical  and  prophetical.  This  is 
a  true  basis  of  division,  as  will  be  seen  hereafter. 

Now  each  of  these  methods  of  division,  whether  accidental, 
official,  territorial,  chronological  or  rhetorical,  contains  some 
elements  of  value ;  but  we  must  penetrate  deeper  in  order  to 
find  the  real  principle  of  arrangement.  There  are  but  two 
methods  of  procedure  in  investigating  the  structure  of  the 
O.  T.  We  must  make  either  the  beginning  or  the  end  our 
point  of  departure.  Here  all  the  lines  of  progress  must  meet. 
Everything  which  belongs  to  the  organic  structure  will  be 
gathered  up  in  its  end.  For  example  :  in  the  study  of  botany, 
we  start  either  from  the  seed  in  which  the  whole  plant  is  unde- 
veloped and  trace  its  growth  in  roots,  leaves,  etc.,  or  else  by 

4 


26  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

reverse  process,  we  survey  the  plant  from  its  consummation, 
and  view  each  part  as  performing  its  function  in  producing 
fruit. 

B.  In  studying  0.  T.  according  to  the  first  of  these  methods, 
^.  e.,  proceeding  from  the  beginning,  it  is  contemplated  as  a 
course  of  training  to  which  the  people  of  God  were  subjected 
for  many  ages.  Regarded  in  this  light,  there  is  little  difficulty 
in  fixing  the  Law  of  Moses  as  the  starting  point  of  this  great 
lesson.  God  chose  Israel  from  among  the  nations,  to  be  a 
peculiar  people  for  himself.  He  led  them  out  of  Egypt,  and 
as  a  first  step  in  training  them  up  for  himself,  he  entered  into 
special  and  formal  covenant  with  them  at  Sinai,  and  gave  them 
a  constitution  and  laws  containing  all  the  germs  of  what  He 
meant  to  teach  them.  The  Pentateuch  {i.  e.,  the  law,  with  its 
historical  introduction)  is  thus  the  first  division  of  the  0.  T. 

The  next  step  was  to  engage  the  people  in  the  observance  of 
this  law.  Their  divine  constitution  was  set  in  operation  and 
allowed  to  work  out  its  fruits  among  them.  The  law  of  God 
shaped  their  history,  and  their  history  added  confirmation  and 
enlargement  to  the  law.  The' history  of  Israel  is  thus  the 
second  divison  of  the  0.  T.,  and  the  office  of  the  historical 
books  was  to  record  the  providential  expansion  and  enforcement 
of  the  law. 

The  third  step  in  divine  training  was  to  have  the  law,  origin- 
ally given  and  applied,  wrought  out,  not  only  in  their  outward 
practice,  but  into  their  inward  life  and  intellectual  convictions. 
This  is  the  purpose  of  the  poetical  books,  which  form  the  third 
division.  Here  we  have  the  subjective  expansion  and  enforce- 
ment of  the  law.  The  law  thus  set  to  work  in  the  national 
life,  came  to  be  wrought  into  the  individual  life,  e.  g.,  The 
Psalms.  These  are  devout  meditations  on  the  law  of  God.  It 
is  a  personal  application  of  the  law. 

In  order  that  this  outward  and  inward  development,  though 
conducted  by  the  divine  superintendence,  and  under  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  divine  spirit,  might  not  fail  of  its  end,  that  end  must 
be  held  up  to  view.  Prophets,  therefore,  were  raised  up  to 
reiterate  and  unfold   the  demands  of  the  law ;    to  expand  the 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  27 

germs  and  seeds  of  a  better  era.  Hence  the  Prophetical  Books, 
in  which  we  have  an  objective  expansion  and  enforcement  of  the 
law,  form  the  fourth  division  of  the  0.  T.  Thus  the  0.  T.  has 
four  clearly  marked  organic  parts,  viz. : 

1.  The  Pentateuch. 

2.  The  Historical  Books. 

3.  The  Poetical  Books. 

4.  The  Prophetical  Books. 

C.  The  other  mode  of  investigating  the  structure  of  the  0.  T. 
is  to  survey  the  book  from  its  end,  which  is  Christ.  While  this 
would  bring  everything  into  review  under  a  different  aspect,  it 
reveals  substantially  the  same  divisions,  and  hence  method  B. 
does  not  give  merely  a  fanciful  division.  And  further,  this 
mode  is  attended  with  three  important  advantages :  (1)  The 
Historical,  Poetical  and  Prophetical  Books  were  previously 
considered  as  separate  lines  of  development,  though  springing 
from  the  same  source.  But  by  this  second  method,  they  are 
exhibited  as  inter-related,  and  converging  to  one  common  end. 
(2)  This  mode  makes  Christ  the  common  figure  and  adjusts  the 
0.  T.  to  Him.  Christ  thus  becomes  the  end  and  controling 
principle  of  the  whole.  (3)  This  mode  also  gives  unity  to  the 
study  of  the  Bible.  Everything  in  the  0.  T.  tends  to  Christ, 
and  everything  in  the  N.  T.  unfolds  Christ,  and  thus  all  our 
knowledge  is  to  be  estimated  from  Christ.  This  method  gives 
unity  and  consistency  to  the  whole  Bible. 

According  to  the  first  method,  the  0.  T.  was  regarded  as  a 
scheme  of  training.  According  to  the  second,  it  is  reviewed  as 
a  scheme  of  training  with  a  definite  end  in  view,  viz. :  to  pre- 
pare the  way  for  the  coming  of  Christ.  When  we  look  at  the 
O.  T.  from  this  point  of  view,  we  see  that,  though  it  is  predic- 
tive of  Him,  it  is  not  such  in  the  same  manner  or  degree 
throughout.  Types  and  prophecies  of  Christ  are  found  to 
accumulate  at  particular  epochs.  Then  follows  an  interval  in 
which  typical  and  prophetical  predictions  are  few.  Then  fol- 
lows another  brilliant  epoch,  succeeded  by  another  decline. 
Thus  there  are  periods  of  rich  instruction,  followed  by  periods 
of  study  on  the  part  of  the  people. 


28  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

These  times  of  marked  predictions  are  never  mere  repetitions. 
Each  has  its  own  distinctive  character  and  quality.  Each  gives 
prominence  to  certain  characteristics  of  Christ's  coming.  One 
serves  as  the  complement  of  another,  and  hence  all  must  be 
combined  to  give  a  complete  conception  of  the  Messiah  and  His 
work. 

Christ  may  be  predicted  negatively  as  well  as  positively,  i.  e., 
evils  endured  or  foretold,  or  imperfections  in  the  existing  form 
of  good,  suggest  Christ  by  way  of  contrast.  They  awaken  a 
sense  of  need  or  deficiency,  and  point  to  Christ  as  the  means  of 
supply.     Christ  is  predicted  positively,  when  directly  set  forth. 

Each  predictive  period  expresses  the  resultant  of  all  its  types 
and  prophecies,  and  the  character  of  each  is  determined  by  the 
character  of  the  types  and  prophecies  peculiar  to  it.  If  these 
be  chiefly  negative,  then  it  is  a  negatively  predictive  period. 
With  this  idea  in  view,  sacred  history,  from  the  call  of  Abraham 
to  the  close  of  the  0.  T,,  naturally  divides  itself  into  a  series  of 
periods  alternatively  negative  and  positive.  First,  there  is  a 
period  of  want,  then  one  devoted  to  the  supply  of  that  want. 

(1)  The  period  of  the  Patriarchs  was  a  negative  one.  It  was  a 
time  of  need.  Promises  were  given  and  the  people  were  kept 
looking  forward  to  the  time  when  their  seed  should  fill  the  land. 

(2)  These  wants  were  supplied  and  expectations  realized  in  the 
time  of  Moses  and  Joshua,  which  marks  a  positive  period. 
Here  the  people  get  possession  of  Canaan.  (3)  The  period  of 
the  Judges  was  negative  in  character.  The  bonds  of  the  nation 
were  too  weak  to  bind  the  tribes  together.  They  needed  a  king. 
(4)  This  want  is  supplied  in  the  time  of  David  and  Solomon, 
which  is  a  positive  period.  (5)  Then  follows  another  negative  ■ 
period,  embracing  the  schism  and  final  captivity  of  the  rival 
kingdoms  of  Judah  and  Israel.  (6)  The  period  of  the  restora- 
tion is  again  positive. 

Now  guided  by  these  features,  and  combining  each  negative 
with  each  positive  period,  three  great  preparatory  epochs  in  0. 
T.  history  present  themselves,  viz. : 

1.  Call  of  Abraham  to  death  of  Joshua. 

2.  To  death  of  Solomon. 

3.  To  close  of  Old  Testament. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  29 

This  partitions  the  history  from  the  time  of  Abraham  to  the 
close  of  the  0.  T.,  that  portion  which  precedes  the  call,  being 
merely  intro'ductory  to  the  first  period.  Transferring  these 
obvious  divisions  to  the  0.  T.  books,  they  fall  into  three  parts : 

1.  Pentateuch  and  Joshua. 

2.  Historical  Books  to  death  of  Solomon,  Poetical  Books, 

(except  Lamentations),  and  Job. 

3.  Eest  of  Historical  Books,  Prophetical  Books,  and  Lamenta- 

tions, (appended  to  Jeremiah). 
Comparing  then  this  triple  division  of  0.  T.  with  the  quadru- 
ple one  before  made  and  based  upon  a  different  ])rinciple,  the 
two  are  found  to  be  closely  allied,  with  only  enough  diversity 
to  show  that  the  alliance  is  not  mechanical.  The  real  difference 
is  that  in  the  former,  the  Historical  Books  are  partitioned  rela- 
tively to  the  other  classes  of  books,  since  at  the  end  of  each 
division,  there  is  really  a  new  revelation  from  God.  The  first 
portion  of  the  History,  (from  Moses  to  Joshua,  inclusive),  ends 
with  a  revelation  of  the  Law ;  the  second,  with  the  Poetical 
Books ;  and  the  third,  with  the  Prophetical  Books.  There  is 
thus,  just  difference  enough  to  reveal  the  unity  of  the  whole  0. 
T.,  and  to  show  that  the  books  separated  under  one  aspect,  are 
united  under  the  other.  Joshua,  for  example,  according  to 
method  C,  continues  and  completes  the  History  of  Pentateuch. 
The  promises  to  the  Patriarchs  were  not  fulfilled  until  the 
premised  land  was  given.  According  to  method  B,  it  is  a 
new  development!  So  Joshua,  according  to  the  different  modes 
of  conception,  may  belong  either  to  the  end  of  the  one,  or  the 
beginning  of  the  other  division ;  and,  in  fact,  it  does  belong  to 
both  periods.  So  again,  Lamentations  may  belong  either  to 
the  second  or  third  class.  If  regard  is  had  to  its  style,  it  must 
go  with  the  Poetical  Books ;  if  it  is  viewed  as  recording  and 
developing  a  great  Providential  lesson,  it  belongs  to  the  period 
of  Jeremiah.  Again,  the  reign  of  Solomon  may  be  regarded, 
either  as  the  sequel  to  David's  reign,  in  that  he  carried  the 
kingdom  to  the  highest  pitch  of  prosperity,  or  the  book  of 
Kings,  recording  that  reign,  and  containing  in  it  the  seeds  of 
the  dissolution  that  followed,  may  be  made  the  beginning  of  a 
new  division. 


30  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

As  to  the  general  relation  of  the  parts,  note  (1)  the  general 
correspondence  between  the  first  and  the  two  following  divisions. 
The  Pentateuch  and  Joshua  fulfill  their  purpose  in  t\^o  spheres — 
individual  experience  and  training,  followed  by  national  train- 
ing. These  spheres  repeat  themselves;  the  former  in  the 
second,  and  the  latter  in  the  third  division.  Judges  and 
Samuel  are  historical  biographies  of  great  men.  The  latter 
contains  the  lives  of  three  leading  characters,  (Samuel,  Saul, 
and  David),  by  whom  the  character  of  the  people  was  shaped. 
Euth  is  a  biographical  sketch  from  private  life.  So  the  poeti- 
cal books  are  personal.  The  third  division  resembles  the  closing 
portion  of  the  first  period,  in  being  national  in  character. 
Kings,  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther,  and  the  Prophets 
have  all  regard  to  the  nation.  (2)  The  number  of  organs  by 
which  the  truth  was  communicated,  is  increased  with  each 
division.  In  the  first  classification,  there  are  only  two  writers  ; 
in  the  second  the  historians  are  separated  from  the  poets  ;  while 
the  third  embraces  the  greatest  number  of  writers,  viz.,  both 
historians  and  prophets.  (3)  A  progress  in  the  style  of  instruc- 
tion adopted  in  each  division,  (a)  The  Pentateuch  and  Joshua 
are  purely  typical.  The  few  prophecies  they  contain  are  lost 
in  the  mass  of  types,  [h]  The  history  from  Judges  to  the 
death  of  Solomon,  together  with  the  poetical  books,  is  of  a 
mixed  character;  but  types  predominate  and  are  the  basis  of 
predictions,  (c)  The  books  of  the  third  division  (historical  and 
prophetical)  also  embrace  a  mixture  of  types'  and  prophecies, 
but  here  the  latter  predominate,  and  the  types  are  almost  lost. 
(4)  These  three  divisions  of  the  0.  T.  severally  render  promi- 
nent the  three  offices  of  Christ.  The  first  division,  i.  e.,  the  law, 
where  sacrifice  is  the  central  object,  points  to  Christ  as  a 
Priest.  The  second  division  revolving  about  the  kingdom, 
under  David  and  Solomon,  regards  Christ  as  King.  In  the 
third  division,  the  prophets  rise  to  prominence,  and  the  people 
(scattered  among  foreign  nations)  take  upon  them  a  prophetic 
character.     This  sets  forth  Christ  as  a  Prophet. 


Section  VIII. 

Historical  Books  of  Old  Testament. 


The  common  element  here  is  history,  which  constitutes  almost 
all  of  the  first  section,  fully  half  of  the  second,  and  much  of  the 
third.  The  importance  of  sacred  history  in  divine  revelation 
consists  in  three  particulars :  (1)  It  is  preliminary  to  and 
forms  the  framework  in  which  all  Grod's  revelations  are  set, 
exhibiting  the  occasion  and  circumstances  of  the  people's  train- 
ing. (2)  History  itself  is  the  medium  of  instruction.  It  is 
exemplary  in  its  character.  (3)  History  is  the  basis  of  doc- 
trines. These  are  not  mere  abstractions,  but  great  cardinal 
facts,  or  deductions  from  such  facts. 

In  studying  history,  one  of  three  methods  may  be  followed, 
viz. :  the  Periodological,  the  Biographical,  or  the  Bibliograph- 
ical. 

According  to  the  first  mode,  history  is  distinguished  into 
periods,  marked  off  by  decisive  and  memorable  events.  It  is 
treated  of  in  large  portions,  minor  details  being  overlooked. 
The  breaks  are  just  rests  or  pauses  in  the  entire  history.  But 
there  are  no  actual  breaks  in  history,  which  is  continuous. 
Such  partitions  are  only  imaginary  lines  of  division.  Besides, 
such  periods  may  be  differently  constituted,  with  or  without 
intrinsic  merit. 

In  following  the  Biographical  Method,  a  number  of  promi- 
nent characters  is  selected.  These  are  collected,  if  possible,  in 
a  continuous  series,  and  the  events  of  their  times  are  made  to 
cluster  around  them.  This  method  has  advantanges  in  that 
it  is  simple,  natural,  aids  the  memory,  has  unity  ;  and  it  excites 
interest,  in  that  it  pertains  to  the  experience  and  character  of  a 


32  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

living  subject.  Still  it  is  insufficient,  because  some  events  do 
not  belong  to  the  life  of  any  one  individual,  however  prominent, 
and  thus  the  chain  of  the  narrative  is  broken. 

The  Bibliographical  Method  partitions  history  according  to 
the  contents  of  the  several  books.  This  method  is  of  value  in 
sacred  history  because  it  comes  from  God.  The  books  are  sacred 
not  only  as  books,  but  in  their  very  form.  Their  divisions,  as 
such,  are  themselves  sacred.  Inconvenience  arises  when  one 
book  seems  to  infringe  upon  another,  either  in  respect  to  time 
or  ground,  as  for  example :  Euth  and  Judges,  Kings  and 
Chronicles,  etc.  But  the  aims  and  characters  of  these  books 
are  quite  distinct. 

If  we  include  the  Pentateuch,  there  are  17  Historical  Books 
in  0.  T.  The  titles,  "  Historical,"  "  Poetical "  and  "  Propheti- 
cal," are  given  to  the  several  books  on  account  of  their  prevail- 
ing character.  Thus  Job  is  history  in  poetry ;  Jonah,  though 
historical,  is  yet,  from  its  types,  prophetical.  Ezekiel  and 
Daniel,  in  giving  an  account  of  the  Babylonish  exile,  contain 
much  material  for  history ;  yet  they  are  properly  put  with  the 
Prophetical  Books. 

The  17  books  above  mentioned  are  not  so  many  disconnected 
histories,  but  constitute  only  ten  distinct  works ;  the  five  books 
of  Moses  forming  one  work;  and  Sam.,  Kings  and  Chron.  each 
being  reckoned  as  a  separate  book.  These  separate  writings, 
though  each  has  its  own  plan  and  author,  are  most  intimately 
related,  and  succeed  one  another  in  order — one  taking  up  the 
history  where  the  last  dropped  it.  Thus  the  Pentateuch,  Joshua, 
Judges,  Sam.  and  Kings  form  such  a  connected  and  consecutive 
history  from  the  creation  to  the  end  of  the  captivity,  that  some 
urge  that  they  are  the  work  of  one  writer.  That  each  book 
begins  where  the  preceding  one  left  off  is  not  a  mere  accident, 
because  each  book  makes  express  allusion  to  its  predecessor, 
and  the  subject  is  formally  resumed,  e.  g.,  Pentateuch  closes 
with  Moses'  death,  and  book  of  Joshua  begins  with  "  now  after 
the  death  of  Moses,"  etc.  So  Joshua  closes  with  Joshua's 
death,  and  Judges  begins  with  "  now  after  the  death  of  Joshua," 
etc.     Judges  2 :  6-9,  refers  to  Joshua  24 :  28-31 ;    thus  con- 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  33 

necting  itself  afresh  with  the  book  preceding  it.  Ezra  repeats 
the  last  verse  of  Chronicles  at  the  beginning  of  his  book  ;  hence 
the  reference  to  preceding  books  is  intentional.  Further,  each 
of  the  historical  books,  succeeding  the  Pentateuch,  begins  with 
the  copulative  conjunction  and  (Heb.)  A  seeming,  though  not 
real,  exception  to  this  rule  is  found  in  Chronicles.  Here  Chap. 
10:  1,  begins  with  and;  and  since  all  the  preceding  chapters 
relate  merely  to  genealogies,  this  is  the  real  beginning  of  the 
book.  This  conjunction  usually  translated,  in  our  English 
version,  "now"  serves  to  link  together  the  contents  of  the 
several  books.  It  should  rather  be  tranvslated  "  and."  It 
shows  that  what  follows  is  not  a  new  work,  but  a  resumption 
of  some  preceding  narrative.  So  Ruth  and  Esther,  beginning 
with  "and,"  are  evidently  the  continuation  of  some  earlier 
work.     Hence  the  books  of  the  Bible  are  linked  as  successive. 

The  names  of  the  Historical  Books  are  generally  derived  from 
their  principal  theme.  Thus  Genesis,  Exodus,  etc.  Samuel 
is  so  called  because  he  is  the  principal  figure.  The  Vulgate 
calls  our  I  and  2  Samuel,  1  and  2  Kings,  and  our  i  and  2 
Kings,  3  and  4  Kings,  because  in  them  begins  the  history  of  the 
kingdom.  Our  version  gives  this  book  both  titles.  In  Ezra, 
Nehemiah,  and  probably  in  Joshua,  the  leading  actor  is  also  the 
author,  and  thus  the  name  is  doubly  appropriate. 

The  Historical  Books  are  variously  numbered  and  classified. 
There  are,  in  all,  17  books,  or  10  distinct  works.  In  the  ancient 
catalogues,  the  five  books  of  Moses  counted  separately,  but 
Samuel,  Kings  and  Chronicles,  one  each,  i.  e.  14  Historical 
Books.  If  Ruth  be  combined  with  Judges,  and  Ezra  with 
Nehemiah,  [or  Samuel  with  Jeremiah]  the  whole  number  is  12. 
Our  Hebrew  Bibles,  which  contain  the  Mazoretic  divisions,  are 
separated  into  three  parts,  viz. : 

1.  The  five  books  of  Moses. 

2.  The  former  Prophets,  being  six  books  of  history,  written 

by  prophets,  viz. :  Joshua,  Judges,  1  and  2  Samuel,  1 
and  2  Kings. 


34  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

3.  The  Hagiographa  (written  by  inspired  men  who  were 
not  strictly  prophets)  including  the  other  six  historical 
books,  viz.  :  Ruth,  Esther,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  1  and  2 
Chronicles. 
Dr.  J.  Addison  Alexander  divided  the  historical  books  into 
three  Pentateuchs.  Of  the  17,  1  and  2  Chronicles  are  not  so 
much  continuations  as  parallel  and  supplementary,  viz. :  to 
Samuel  and  Kings.  Omitting  these  there  remain  15  continuous 
books.  These  he  forms  into  three  groups  of  five  books  each. 
Group  1  consists  of  the  five  books  of  Moses,  i.  e.,  the  history 
from  the  creation  to  death  of  Moses.  Group  2  contains  Joshua, 
Judges,  Ruth,  1  and  2  Samuel,  i.  e.,  the  death  of  David.  Group 
3  is  made  up  of  1  and  2  Kings,  Ezra,  Nehemiah  and  Esther, 
i.  e..  to  the  close  of  the  0.  T.  canon.  Each  of  these  Pentateuchs 
contains  one  book  of  an  episodical  character.  Thus,  in  group 
1  it  is  Leviticus,  i.  e.,  the  history  of  legislation ;  in  group  2, 
Euth,  i.  e.,  the  history  of  David's  family ;  and  in  group  3, 
Esther,  i.  e.,  the  history  of  the  deliverance  of  the  Jews  in 
Persia.  This  division  of  the  historical  books  is  only  a  modifi- 
cation of  one  that  was  proposed  by  Epiphanius  in  the  4th  cen- 
tury, and  which  he  applied  to  the  whole  0.  T.  He  reckoned 
the  total  number  of  books  as  22 ;  and,  neglecting  Ezra  with 
Nehemiah  and  Esther,  divided  the  whole  into  four  Pentateuchs. 

1.  Five  books  of  Moses,  or  Pentateuch  proper. 

2.  A  Pentateuch  of  historical   books  :    Joshua,  Judges  and 

Euth,  Samuel,  Kings  and  Chronicles. 

3.  A  Pentateuch  of  poetical  books,  viz. :  Job,  Psalms,  Pro- 

verbs, Ecclesiastes  and  Song  of  Solomon. 

4.  A  Pentateuch  of  prophetical  books,  viz. :  Isaiah,  Jeremiah 

and  Lamentations,  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  and  minor  prophets. 
According  to  another  distribution,  the  historical  books  are 
divided  into  three  groups  with   reference   to   the  three  great 
periods  of  preparation  for  Christ's  coming. 

1.  Pentateuch  and  Joshua. 

2.  Judges,  Euth,  and  Samuel. 

3.  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Esther. 

Kings  and  Chronicles  belong  partly  to  the  2d,  but  mainly  to 
the  3d  group. 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  35 

Again  :  if  the  Pentateuch  be  excluded,  and  Samuel,  Kings 
and  Chronicles  be  each  counted  one  book,  then  the  historical 
books  form  three  groups  of  three  each,  or  triplets,  viz. : 

1.  Joshua,  Judges,  Ruth. 

2.  Samuel,  Kings,  Chronicles. 

3.  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther. 

Group  1  covers  the  period  of  the  Hebrew  Commonwealth. 

Group  2  covers  the  history  of  the  Hebrew  Monarchy. 

Group  3  covers  the  period  subsequent  to  the  captivity,  i.  e., 
the  period  of  foreign  domination. 

Several  Historical  Books  are  anonymous,  and  therefore  their 
authorship  can  only  be  conjectured,  viz. :  Judges,  Ruth,  Sam- 
uel, Kings,  Chronicles,  and  Esther.  In  the  Pentateuch  and 
Joshua,  the  names  of  the  writers  are  mentioned  at  the  close, 
and  they  speak  of  themselves  in  the  third  person.  Nehemiah 
is  the  only  Historical  Book  which  has  an  inspired  title  contain- 
ing the  name  of  the  author  prefixed.  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  are 
the  only  Historical  Books  in  which  the  author  speaks  in  the 
first  person.  The  third  person  is  of  course  used  also.  The 
Historical  Books  thus  stand  in  remarkable  contrast  with 
the  Prophetical  Books,  which  have  always  a  title  containing 
the  author's  name.  They  differ  in  the  character  of  their  con- 
tents, for  (1)  the  authentication  of  a  prophecy  rests  upon  the 
divine  commission  of  the  prophet.  The  prophet  must  be  known 
before  the  prophecy  can  be  received  as  true.  With  history  it 
is  difi"erent.  Its  credibility  rests  not  upon  personal  authority, 
but  upon  the  general  acceptance,  by  contemporaries,  of  the 
event  recorded.  (2)  The  attitude  of  the  prophet  and  the  whole 
posture  of  his  mind  is  different  from  that  of  the  historian.  The 
latter  is  only  the  reporter  of  facts  as  they  occurred,  and  the 
narrative  is  objective.  The  question  of  moment  is,  what  are 
the  facts  ?  not  who  is  the  writer  ?  On  the  other  hand,  the 
prophet  is  not  a  simple  reporter ;  he  is  delivering  his  message, 
and  fulfilling  his  own  personal  commission.  Hence  Daniel,  ia 
the  six .  Historical  Chapters,  uses  the  third  person,  but  in  the 
Prophetical  Chapters,  the  first  person.  So  with  other  books, 
e.g.,  Isaiah.     The  like  phenomenon  occurs  in  the  N.  T.     The 


86  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

gospels  were  originally  anonymous,  and  their  present  titles, 
containing  the  names  of  their  authors,  are  derived  only  from 
tradition.  The  writers  speak  of  themselves  only  in  the  third 
person.  In  the  Epistles,  however,  (Hebrews  alone  excepted), 
and  in  the  book  of  Revelation,  the  first  person  is  used. 

The  credibility  of  an  historian  may  be  tested  by  two  criteria  : 
(1)  His  intention  to  relate  the  facts  truly,  and  (2)  his  ability  so 
to  do,  i.  e.,  opportunity  for  knowing  the  facts.  If  the  historian 
have  both  of  these  qualifications,  his  work  will  be  reliable  his- 
tory ;  if  either  be  absent  it  will  be  untrustworthy,  e.  g.,  no  one 
expects  to  find  in  Homer  a  faithful  narrative  of  the  siege  of 
Troy.  He  accepted  legends  and  embellished  them.  It  was  not 
his  aim  to  record  the  simple  historical  truth.  On  the  other 
hand,  Livy  desired  to  give  the  true  history  of  Rome;  but  though 
he  had  the  intention,  he  had  not  the  opportunity  to  relate  facts. 
He  wrote  so  long  after  the  events  occurred  that  much  he  has 
related  must  be  regarded  as  fabulous.  But  these  criteria  meet 
in  the  0.  T.  Historians. 

I.  It  is  universally  admitted  that  they  believed  what  they 
wrote,  and  their  intention  was  to  record  facts.  If  this  be 
denied,  then,  (1)  these  books  ofi'er  themselves  as  true  histories 
of  the  periods  to  which  they  relate,  and  such  is  the  impression 
always  produced  upon  readers.  (2)  This  being  the  profession 
of  their  writers,  their  intention  must  have  corresponded  with 
this  avowal,  else  the  writers  are  guilty  of  fraud,  which  is 
incredible.  (3)  If  these  writers  had  attempted  to  practice  a 
fraud,  it  would  have  been  impracticable,  because  the  facts  were 
matters  of  general  history.  At  least  they  represent  the  truth 
as  it  was  then  received. 

II.  If  it  was  the  intention  of  the  sacred  writers  to  relate  the 
truth,  they  had  abundant  means  of  ascertaining  it.  For  (1)  in 
some  instances,  the  writers  were  themselves  eye-witnesses  or 
contemporaries  of  the  events  recorded  ;  e.  g.,  in  Exodus,  Leviti- 
cus, Numbers,  Deuteronomy,  Joshua,  Ezra,  Nehemiah.  (2)  In 
other  cases,  the  writers  were  in  possession  of  pre-existent 
v/ritings  and  records,  both  official  and  private.  Thus  Kings  and 
Chronicles  constantly  refer  to  previous  accounts,  and  there  may 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  37 

have  been  others  not  referred  to.  (3)  Popular  tradition  is,  to 
a  certain  extent,  a  reliable  source  of  history,  especially  when 
confirmed  by  ancient  monuments.  (4)  The  truth  and  accuracy 
of  these  historical  writings  is  corroborated  by  the  agreement 
of  sacred  writers  among  themselves,  in  the  way  of  casual  and 
undesigned  coincidences,  and  harmonizing  with  all  that  can  be 
learned  from  profane  sources.  (5)  In  addition  toother  guaran- 
tees, these  writings  have  a  special  sanction  in  their  divine 
inspiration.  The  only  matters  whose  credibility  has  ever  been 
questioned  are  the  supernatural  facts  it  records.  Hence  it  is 
claimed  in  some  quarters  that  it  is  only  mythical  in  character. 
But, 

[a)  Though  this  is  an  admissible  objection  in  profane  history, 
even  there  it  is  allowed,  not  because  the  supernatural  is  incredi- 
ble, but  because  there  is  no  adequate  evidence  that  the  alleged 
event  occurred. 

(6)  Supernatural  events  cannot  be  pronounced  impossible, 
except  on  atheistic  and  pantheistic  grounds.  The  former  says  : 
"  There  is  no  God,"  the  latter,  "  Everything  is  God."  If  then 
it  is  not  impossible,  it  may  have  occurred,  and  sufficient  evi- 
dence may  be  adduced  to  prove  its  reality.  The  0.  T.  books 
are  not  to  be  judged  prior  to  a  candid  examination. 

(c)  Miracles  are  not  only  not  impossible,  but  there  is  no 
greater  antecedent  improbability  against  their  occurrence  in 
sacred  history  than  lies  against  the  occurrence  of  natural  events 
due  to  ordinary  causes.  The  entire  scheme  of  God's  revelation 
viewed  as  a  whole,  is  supernatural. 

{d)  The  miracles  of  the  0.  and  N.  T.  are  recorded  under  such 
circumstances,  as  to  give  the  highest  degree  of  credibility  to 
the  record.  The  miracles  of  the  Pentateuch  occurred  when 
Moses  was  an  eye-witness,  e.  g.,  The  plagues  in  Egypt ;  the 
miracles  in  the  wilderness.  So  the  miracles  in  the  days  of 
Joshua  are  recorded  by  a  contemporary  and  eye-witness.  In 
the  book  of  Judges  all  the  miracles  are  Samson's,  and  are 
recorded  by  the  writer  of  the  book.  In  like  manner  the  super- 
natural in  the  book  of  Daniel  is  recorded  by  the  writer  [Daniel]. 
So  with  the  miracles  of  Elijah  and  Elisha.     These  are  detailed 


375683 


m  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

in  the  books  of  Kings,  which,  although  not  written  till  after 
the  capitivity,  are  compiled  from  contemporaneous  annals.  The 
same  is  true  of  the  N.  T.,  which  is  also  written  by  men  who 
were  contemporaries  of  the  events  recorded. 


Section  IX. 

Authorship  of  Pentateuch. 


Pentateuch  claims  to  have  been  written  by  Moses.  For  this 
see  its  own  statements,  viz.  :  three  in  Exodus  and  one  in  Num- 
bers, where  (1)  Moses  is  directed  by  God  to  record  various 
individual  transactions  which  actually  exist  in  the  Pentateuch. 
In  Exodus  24 :  4  and  7,  after  God  had  announced  the  funda- 
mental laws  of  his  covenant,  Moses  told  the  people  the  words 
of  the  law,  and  (v.  4),  "  Moses  wrote  all  the  words  of  the  Lord  ;" 
and  in  verse  7,  "  he  took  the  book  of  the  covenant,  and  read  in 
the  audience  of  the  people,"  who  promised  to  obey  it.  Now 
according  to  some,  the  "book  of  the  covenant"  means  the 
Pentateuch  as  far  as  then  written  ;  but  from  the  connection,  it 
evidently  refers  to  the  laws  just  given  as  the  basis  of  God's 
covenant  with  Israel,  viz. :  the  Ten  Commandments  in  Exodus 
20,  and  the  special  ordinances  contained  in  Exodus  21-23. 
Again  after  the  covenant  had  been  broken  by  the  worship  of 
the  golden  calf,  and  God,  in  Exodus  34 :  10-26,  had  renewed 
that  covenant,  God  says  to  Moses,  in  verse  27,  "  Write  thou 
these  words,  for  after  the  tenor  of  these  words  I  have  made  a 
covenant  with  thee  and  with  Israel."  Again  :  in  Exodus 
17 :  14,  after  the  victory  over  Amalek,  the  Lord  said  to  Moses, 
"  Write  this  for  a  memorial  in  a  book,  and  rehearse  it  in  the 
ears  of  Joshua,  for  I  will  utterly  put  out  the  remembrance  of 
Amalek  from  under  Heaven."  And,  once  again,  in  Numbers 
33  :  2,  Moses  wrote  their  goings  out  according  to  their  journeys 
by  the  commandment  of  the  Lord.  The  question  arises  whether 
Moses'  authorship  is   to   be  confined   to    these  passages,   and 


40  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

whether  they  were  simply  incorporated  in  the  Pentateuch. 
This  has  been  claimed  by  some,  who  urge  that  the  explicit 
mention  of  Moses'  having  written  these  specific  passages  is  a 
proof  that  he  wrote  no  others.  But  (2)  the  falsity  of  this 
assertion  appears  (a)  from  the  terms  of  Exodus  17 :  14,  where, 
"  Write  this  for  a  memorial  in  the  Book  "  [Th§  Heb.  definite 
article  being  used],  implies  some  well  know  volume.  Hence, 
Moses  had  begun,  or  was  about  to  begin,  the  preparation  of 
the  Book,  in  which  to  record  God's  dealings  with  the  people ; 
and  it  is  evident  that  he  was  not  to  record  individual  passages 
as  separate  and  detached  statements,  but  to  enter  them  in  a 
volume  already  commenced.  From  the  four  passages,  above 
quoted,  it  is  evident  that  the  book  contained  matters  both  of 
legislation  and  history,  for  each  of  these  departments  is  repre- 
sented by  two  of  the  citations.  It  is  objected  in  Exodus  17  :  14, 
that  the  article  is  merely  represented  by  a  vowel  point  and 
these  points  do  not  belong  to  the  original  text.  But  the  sense 
of  the  passage  requires  "The  Book,"  and  it  is  natural  to  sup- 
pose that  "The  Book  "  was  the  Pentateuch.  There  is  no  record 
of  a  monograph  by  Moses.  (5)  The  direction  given  to  Moses 
to  write  these  things  shows  that  it  was  deemed  important  to 
commit  them  to  writing,  and  that  Moses  was  the  right  person 
to  do  it.  This  makes  it  probable  that  other  important  matters 
would  also  be  preserved  in  writing,  (c)  The  mention  of  writing 
in  these  four  passages  carries  no  presumption  that  Moses  wrote 
nothing  else.  The  respective  writers  in  Isaiah  30 :  8 ;  Jere- 
miah SO :  2 ;  Ezekiel  43  :  11 ;  Habakkuk  2:2;  etc.,  are  said  to 
write  certain  things,  only  because  those  particulars  were 
specially  important;  not  because  they  embraced  all  they  ever 
wrote.  {d)  It  is  admitted  by  those  who  deny  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  that  he  wrote  more  than  these 
four  passages. 

But  (3)  we  have  explicit  testimony  that  Moses  wrote  the 
whole  book,  for  in  Deut.  31:9,  it  is  recorded  that  "  Moses 
wrote  this  law,  and  delivered  it  unto  the  priests  and  the  sons 
of  Levi,  which  bear  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord,  and 
unto  all  the  elders  of  Israel."     And  in  v.  24,  it  is  said,  "  It 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  41 

:arae  to  pass  that  when  Moses  had  made  an  end  of  writing  the 
kvords  of  this  law  in  a  book,  until  they  were  finished,"  etc. 
Every  thing  here  depends  upon  what  is  meant  by  "  The  Law  " 
md  "  Book  of  the  Law."  Some  allege  that  it  refers  only  to  the 
Pen  Commandments ;  others,  to  some  paragraph  in  Deuter- 
Dnomy,  or  to  all  the  laws  in  Deuteronomy,  or  to  the  entire 
book  of  Deuteronomy,  but  not  to  any  of  the  preceding  books, 
Dr  to  all  the  Pentateuch,  save  Deuteronomy,  or  to  the  entire 
Pentateuch. 

This  is  not  a  question  to  be  left  to  caprice,  for  (a)  the  usage 
of  the  terms,  "  Law  "  and  "  Book  of  the  Law  "  invariably  signify 
the  entire  Pentateuch,  unless  they  are  specially  limited.  (6) 
The  same  thing  appears  from  the  unity  of  the  Pentateuch 
which  has  one  theme,  one  plan,  and  contains  a  uniform  and 
continuous  history.  This  creates  a  presumption  for  a  unity  of 
authorship.  No  proof  can  be  adduced  that  ainy  of  its  parts 
were  ever  independent  of  the  rest.  If  Moses  wrote  any  of  it, 
he  wrote  the  whole.  Besides,  Deuteronomy  implies  the  exist- 
ence of  the  four  preceding  books,  (c)  This  passage  at  the  end 
of  Deuteronomy  must  be  taken  along  with  Exodus  17  :  14. 
For  the  book  being  prepared  in  Exodus  is  the  same  book  which 
is  completed  in  Deuteronomy,  {d)  The  same  conclusion  is 
reached  by  considering  that  the  law  here  spoken  of  was  that 
law  which  was  kept  in  the  side  of  the  ark,  i.  e.,  the  Pentateuch, 
which  constituted  the  code  of  the  nation.  Some  object  to  this 
conclusion  (1)  because  in  Deuteronomy  27  :  3-8,  Moses  directs 
the  people  to  set  up  two  great  stones,  and  plaster  them  with 
plaster,  and  "  write  upon  them  all  the  words  of  this  law  when 
thou  are  passed  over  Jordan."  They  say  that  it  is  inconceiv- 
able that  the  entire  Pentateuch  could  have  been  written  on 
these  stones,  and  therefore  that  it  is  not  the  Pentateuch  that  is 
referred  to.  But  (a)  this  is  only  an  argument  addressed  to 
our  ignorance.  We  know  nothing  about  the  possibilities  of  the 
case.  (6)  It  is  a  common  opinion  that  the  law  here  denotes 
only  Deuteronomy,  or  perhaps  only  the  legal  parts  of  that  book. 
This  view  is  confirm.ed  by  the  context  in  verse  1st,  where  it 
reads  :  "  keep  all  the  commandments  which  I  command  you  this 

6 


42  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

day."  One  cannot  argue  from  a  passage  linaited  by  its  context 
to  another  that  is  not  thus  limited,  (c)  In  Joshua  8  :  32,  this 
direction  is  carried  into  effect,  and  a  distinction  is  drawn 
between  the  words  written  on  the  stones,  and  those  written  in 
the  book  of  the  law. 

It  is  further  objected  (2)  that  the  testimony  derived  from 
Deuteronomy  31,  is  self-contradictory.  For  in  v.  9,  Moses  is 
said  to  have  written  the  law  and  delivered  it  to  the  priests  and 
elders ;  but  in  v.  24-26,  it  reads  :  "  When  Moses  had  made 
an  end  of  writing  the  words  of  this  law  in  a  book,  until  they 
were  finished,"  Moses  commanded  the  Levites  to  put  the  book 
in  the  side  of  the  ark.  The  difficulty  urged  is :  How  could 
Moses  have  written  further,  after  handing  the  book  over  to  the 
Levites  ?  This  objection  is  a  gross  absurdity,  for  no  one  ever 
held  that  Moses  wrote  the  later  portions  of  Deuteronomy,  where 
his  own  death  and  burial  are  recorded.  The  only  real  question 
is:  How  far  did  he  write?  Three  solutions  have  been  sug- 
gested :  (1)  Baumgarten  believes  that  the  portion  written  by 
Moses  closed  with  the  end  of  chap.  30.  Then  the  testimony  to 
the  Mosaic  authorship  would  be  given  by  some  one  else  than 
Moses.  (2)  Havernick  holds  that  Moses  wrote  to  the  end  of 
chap.  31,  and  that  he  himself  gave  an  account  of  the  delivery 
of  the  law  to  the  priests  and  Levites.  Indeed,  he  supposes  that 
Moses  may  have  written  to  the  end  of  chap.  32,  and  that  he 
himself,  having  received  back  the  book  after  its  formal  transfer, 
inserted  his  final  song,  and  the  divine  summons  to  go  up  into 
Mount  Abarim,  and  die  there.  (3)  Hengstenberg's  opinion, 
which  lies  midway  between  these  two,  is  the  best.  He  supposes 
that  the  first  delivery  of  the  law  (v.  9)  took  place  publicly,  and 
was  intended  as  a  formal  symbolic  act.  They  were  to  be  guided 
by  this  law.  This  public  act  having  been  performed,  Moses 
receives  the  law  back  again,  and  added  up  to  chap.  31 :  23, 
concluding  the  charge  to  Joshua.  The  Levites  then  get  it 
finally,  and  the  record  of  this  last  delivery  is  made  by  another. 
This  view  accords  with  the  exact  words  used  in  verse  24. 
Thus  there  are  two  independent  testimonies  to  the  Mosaic 
authorship  :  that  of  Moses  himself  in  verse  9,  and  that  of  some 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  43 

other  writer  in  verse  24.  The  altered  tone  of  the  closing  verses 
of  Deuteronomy  is  noticeable.  Thus  in  chap.  31 :  1,  Moses  is 
called  the  "  Man  of  God ;"  in  chap.  34 :  5,  the  "  Servant  of  the 
Lord,"  and  in  chap.  34 :  10,  "  there  arose  not  a  prophet  since 
in  Israel  like  unto  Moses."  This  peculiarity  in  the  application 
of  epithets  to  Moses  is  not  found  in  the  early  parts  of  the  book. 
This  is  an  incidental  proof  of  Mosaic  authorship,  and  is  there- 
fore most  valuable. 

There  are  other  passages  in  Deuteronomy  not  expressly 
mentioning  that  Moses  wrote,  which  imply  the  existence  of 
a  written  law.  Thus,  Deut.  17  :  18,  the  king,  in  addressing 
his  people,  refers  to  the  law  as  written ;  for  every  king  had 
to  copy  the  law  in  a  book  out  of  that  which  was  before  the 
priests  and  Levites.  If  the  law  was  written  in  Moses'  time, 
Moses  wrote  it.  So  in  Deut.  28:  58  and  61,  we  read,  "the 
words  of  this  law  which  are  written  in  this  book;"  in  chap. 
29 :  20,  21  and  27,  "  all  the  curses  that  are  written  in  this 
book  ;  "  in  chap.  30  :  10,  "  commandments  and  statutes  which 
are  written  in  this  book  of  the  law,"  etc.  These  passages  imply 
that  the  book  was  then  written,  and  therefore  written  by  Moses 
himself.  Some  object  that  Moses  could  not  speak  of  the  curses 
he  was  then  uttering  as  already  written,  but  (1)  they  may  have 
been  written  and  then  [Ex.  24 :  7]  read  before  the  people ;  or 

(2)  it  may  refer  to  the  preceding  part  which  was  written ;  or 

(3)  Moses  may  have  spoken  by  way  of  anticipation,  and  after- 
wards, in  reducing  his  language  to  writing,  he  may  have  modi- 
fied it  to  suit  the  occasion ;  or  (4)  it  may  have  been  spoken  of 
his  purpose.  In  Deut.  1:5,"  Moses  began  to  declare  this  law." 
Some  argue  that  this  means  "  to  write  down  "  the  law ;  but  its 
true  significance  is  "  to  expound."  We  may  not  have  the 
precise  portions  that  Moses  used. 

It  is  objected  (3)  to  the  Mosaic  authorship  that  Moses  is 
spoken  of  in  the  third  person.  But  many  instances  of  this 
occur,  for  which  see  Joshua,  Ezra,  the  Evangelists,  the  histori- 
cal passages  in  prophetical  books,  Caesar,  Xenophon,  etc.,  etc. 
It  is  a  common  usage,  and  arises  from  the  attitude  of  the  writer 
as  an  historian,  in  which  he  speaks  of  himself  as  he  does  of 
others. 


44  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

(4)  Another  objection  is  drawn  from  Numbers  12 :  3, 
("  Now  the  man,  Moses,  was  very  meek,"  etc.)  viz. :  That 
Moses  would  not  have  spoken  thus  of  himself.  To  this  it  may- 
be answered,  [a)  that  if  Moses  be  not  the  author,  it  is  remarka- 
ble that  this  should  be  the  only  passage  of  the  kind.  For  other 
cases  of  the  seeming  laudation  of  Moses,  see  Exodus  11 :  3. 
("  The  man  Moses  was  very  great,"  etc.)  Where  it  is  the 
simple  statement  of  a  fact;  Numbers  12:  7-8,  ("My  servant 
Moses  is  faithful,")  etc.  This  latter  is  merely  a  repetition  of 
the  Lord's  words.  (6)  The  apparent  difficulty  is  reduced  by 
observing  its  purpose.  It  is  not  empty  self-praise,  but  a  proper 
vindication  of  himself.  It  was  necessary  to  show  that  the  arro- 
gance of  Aaron  and  Miriam  was  unwarranted.  Besides  Moses 
showed  no  passion,  for  Numbers  12  :  13,  he  prayed  that  Miriam 
might  not  be  destroyed  but  healed,  (c)  It  is  a  characteristic 
of  the  sacred  writers  to  lay  aside  all  self-consciousness.  They 
live  so  entirely  in  the  presence  of  God,  that  they  lose  all  idea  of 
self,  which  they  neither  praise  nor  depreciate.  No  false  modesty 
excludes  them  from  speaking  the  truth.  Thus  Moses  in  Exodus 
2 :  12,  confesses  that  he  slew  an  Egyptian ;  Exodus  3  :  11,  and 
4  :  1  and  10,  his  unwillingness  to  obey  God's  command  to  go  to 
Pharaoh ;  Exodus  4 :  24-26,  that  he  neglected  the  rite  of  cir- 
cumcision in  his  own  family;  Numbers  20:  12,  his  and  Aaron's 
sin  that  kept  them  from  entering  the  promised  land,  etc.  [d) 
Parallels  are  found  in  the  cases  of  other  inspired  men.  Thus 
Paul,  1  Cor.  15  :  10,  says :  "I  labored  more  abundantly  than 
they  all"  So  John,  (21 :  20),  speaks  of  himself  as  "  the  disciple 
whom  Jesus  loved."  So  Daniel,  1 :  20  and  21,  speaks  of  the 
Hebrew  youth  as  being  "  ten  times  better  than  all  the  magi- 
cians" of  Persia.  This  implies  no  vanity  in  the  men  who  make 
use  of  these  expressions.  They  take  no  praise  to  themselves, 
but  refer  it  to  the  grace  of  God.  As  Paul  says,  "  yet  not  I,  but 
the  grace  of  God,  which  was  with  rae."  If  this  fact  about 
Moses  was  true,  and  the  occasion  called  for  it,  and  if  it  would 
have  been  proper  for  another  to  write  it,  why  might  not  Moses 
record  it  about  himself?  (g)  If  the  objection  be  insuperable, 
and  if  Moses  could  not  himself  have  made  the  statement,  it 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  45 

would  not  follow  that  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch 
would  be  overthrown.  For  (1)  the  word  translated  meek  in  our 
version  may  also  be  translated  afflicted,  and  this  rendering  was 
adopted  by  Luther.  (2)  This  verse  may  not  have  been  in  the 
original  text,  but  may  have  been  afterwards  added.  It  is  possi- 
bly a  verse  out  of  one  or  more  passages  introduced  by  Ezra. 
This  last  expedient  need  only  be  resorted  to  in  a  case  of  obvious 
necessity,  but  the  passage  involved  presents  no  insuperable 
difficulty. 

The  Pentateuch,  therefore,  claims  to  be  the  production  of 
Moses.  There  must  be  some  real  cause  for  its  falsity,  before 
this  claim  can  be  set  aside.  Now  there  is  prima  facie  evidence 
of  Moses  being  the  author.  If  the  Pentateuch  makes  this 
claim,  it  must  be  well  founded.  For  :  I.  Note  the  character  of 
the  book  itself.  The  Pentatuch  is  not  merely  a  private  record 
of  notorious  facts,  like  Herodotus',  or  Thucydides',  Histories ; 
nor  simply  a  sacred  and  canonical  book,  like  those  of  the 
prophets;  but  it  is  more  than  both  combined.  It  is  the  basis 
of  the  national  organization  of  Israel.  It  contains  their  con- 
stitution, and  religious  laws.  It  contains  minute  particulars  as 
to  the  government  of  their  daily  life,  in  respect  to  meat  and 
drink,  sacrificial  offerings,  and  very  many  observances,  both  of 
a  public  and  private  nature.  Now  it  is  inconceivable  that  such 
a  system  could  have  been  imposed  upon  the  people,  if  it  did 
not  come  from  Moses  as  it  professed  to  do.  If  it  were  written 
in  another  age,  and  by  another  pen  than  that  of  Moses,  it 
could  never  have  been  accepted  by  the  people,  any  more  than  a 
pretended  act  of  the  Congress  of  United  States.  No  people 
could  imagine  that  they  were  under  laws  of  which  they  never 
heard.  Hence  the  character  of  the  work  precludes  all  ideas  of 
forgery. 

II.  The  impossibility  of  the  Pentateuch  being  a  forgery  is 
evident  from  the  chain  of  connected  testimony,  extending  back 
to  the  death  of  Moses.  This  is  found  in  all  the  books  of  0.  T., 
beginning  with  Joshua  and  extending  to  the  close.  Examine 
(1)  the  Historical  Books,  where  sufficient  evidence  is  found  in 
various  particulars,    (a)  Express  mention  is  made  of  the  volume 


4r,  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

of  Pentateuch.  Thus,  it  is  written  in  Joshua  1 :  7  and  8, 
"  observe  the  words  of  this  book  of  tlie  law."  A  written  record 
is  referred  to.  See  also  Joshua  8:31  and  32,  which  quotes 
Deut.  27 :  5  and  6 ;  Jos.  23 :  6 ;  etc.  In  addition  to  these 
general  references  to  the  Pentateuch  as  a  whole,  there  are  also 
(6)  special  references  to  individual  laws.  Thus,  Jos.  3 :  3, 
alludes  to  the  ark;  Jos.  18:  1,  to  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation ;  22 :  29,  to  various  offerings  uf  the  law ;  21:4,  to 
the  priesthood  in  the  house  of  Aaron ;  21  :  2,  to  the  Levites' 
having  cities  to  dwell  in ;  20,  to  cities  of  refuge ;  5  :  2,  to 
circumcision;  5  :  10,  to  theannual  passover,  etc.  (c)  References 
are  made  to  historical  statements  of  the  Pentateuch  which  are 
presupposed  to  be  true.  Joshua  finds  the  peoph  just  where  the 
Pentateuch  leaves  them.  Thus,  in  Joshua  24 :  1-13,  there  is 
described  the  descent  of  Israel  from  Terah  down  to  its  own  day. 
In  Joshua  2 :  10,  there  is  a  reference  to  certain  public  matters, 
viz. :  the  drying  up  of  the  Red  Sea ;  the  overthrow  of  the 
Amorites,  In  Joshua  14 :  6,  the  sending  out  of  the  spies  is 
alluded  to.  See  also  22:  17;  24:  9-13;  13  :  22-33.  [d)  There 
are  exact  citations  of,  or  allusions  to,  the  Pentateuch.  Thus, 
Joshua  1  :  3-5,  is  quoted  from  Deut.  11 :  24  and  25. 

These  above  illustrations,  taken  solely  from  the  book  of 
Joshua,  are  equally  true  of  all  the  0.  T.  books.  The  whole  of 
Joshua  is  built  upon  the  Pentateuch,  which  it  everywhere  pre- 
supposes. So  with  all  the  succeeding  books  of  the  0,  T.  All 
the  subsequent  history  of  Israel  rests  upon  the  Pentateuch, 
which  is  constantly  referred  to  as  an  historical  basis.  (2)  Like 
arguments  may  be  drawn  from  the  poetical  books.  Psalms  1, 
and  indeed  the  whole  book  of  Psalms,  consists  of  devout  medi- 
tations on  the  law  of  God.  Several  Psalms,  such  as  78,  105, 
106,  135,  136,  give  a  summary  of  the  early  history  of  the 
people,  and  this  account  is  really  cited  from  the  Pentateuch. 
Festivals  are  repeatedly  referred  to.  The  law  was  in  written 
form,  and  was  not  handed  down  by  oral  tradition,  as  is  declared 
by  Psalms  40  :  7,  viz. :  "  In  the  volume  of  the  book  it  is  written 
of  me."  (3)  The  prophetical  books  likewise  abound  in  allusions 
to  facts  and  revelations  contained   in   the  Pentateuch.     The 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  47 

argument,  therefore,  for  its  Mosaic  authorship  is  irresistible. 
The  allusions  found,  while  only  indirect  and  incidental,  occur  in 
every  part.  There  are  not  a  few  express  statements  which 
might  have  been  interpolated.  Pentateuch,  therefore,  can  be 
traced  back  to  the  death  of  Moses  ;  and  since  its  authority  has 
always  been  recognized,  it  must  be  what  it  professes  to  be. 

III.  A  separate  consideration  is  due  to  the  esteem  and  rever- 
ence with  which  the  Pentateuch  is  regarded  in  the  schismatical 
kingdom  of  Israel,  e.  g.,  the  Ten  Tribes.  The  leaders  of  this 
movement  were  under  the  strongest  temptation  to  deny  the 
genuineness  and  authority  of  these  books,  which  required  that 
there  should  be  but  one  people,  one  sanctuary,  that  the 
sovereignty  should  belong  to  Judah,  etc.  The  idolatry  of  the 
Ten  Tribes  in  their  worship  of  the  golden  calf,  and  their  priest- 
hood which  was  not  of  the  Tribe  of  Levi,  were  gross  violations 
of  the  Laws  of  Moses.  Thus  the  hostility  between  the  rival 
kingdoms  of  Judah  and  Israel  was  very  strong.  Still  the  latter, 
though  greatly  tempted,  never  denied  the  Pentateuch.  And 
this  in  itself  is  a  sufficient  proof  that  Moses  wrote  it.  If  the 
Pentateuch  had  been  later  than  the  schism  of  Jeroboam,  and 
had  originated  in  Judah,  the  Ten  Tribes  would  never  have 
accepted  it.  But  if  it  existed  then,  and  was  recognized,  it  must 
have  originated  long  before,  and  have  been  regarded  with  such 
veneration  that  the  Ten  Tribes  did  not  attempt  to  dispute  its 
claims.  That  such  was  the  case  is  easily  proved.  The  Samari- 
tan Pentateuch  was  once  considered  a  strong  point  in  this  argu- 
ment. This  people  admitted  as  genuine  only  the  Five  Books  of 
Moses,  with  a  mutilated  form  of  the  Book  of  Joshua.  It  was 
argued,  therefore,  that  as  the  most  bitter  hostility  existed 
between  Jews  and  Samaritans,  the  latter  would  never  have 
adopted  the  Pentateuch  from  the  Jews  ;  therefore  they  must 
have  obtained  it  from  the  Ten  Tribes.  The  MSS.  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch, which  still  existed  among  the  Samaritans,  were  consid- 
ered to  have  come  from  the  Ten  Tribes  and  not  from  Judah. 
If  this  argument  held  good  it  would  materially  aid  in  establish- 
ing the  Mosaic  authorship,  but  it  is  not  now  considered  valid. 
It  is  conceded  that  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  is  much  later  in 


48  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

date  than  the  schism,  and  that  it  was  derived  from  Jewish 
copies  subsequent  to  the  exile.  The  Samaritans  were  not 
descendants  of  the  Ten  Tribes,  but  of  heathen  colonists,  intro- 
duced into  Samaria  by  the  king  of  Assyria,  [2  Kings  17  :  24, 
Ezra  4:  10].  These  Samaritans  claimed  to  be  brethren  of  the 
Jews,  whom  they  offered  to  assist  in  rebuilding  their  temple. 
This  advance  was  repulsed,  and  hence  arose  the  deadly  feud 
between  these  two  peoples.  The  Samaritans,  however,  still 
asserted  that  they  were  the  descendants  of  the  Patriarchs,  and 
in  order  to  establish  this  claim,  they  eagerly  seized  upon  the 
Pentateuch,  rejecting,  however,  all  those  books,  which  taught 
that  Jerusalem  was  the  only  place  of  worship.  Though  this 
argument  has  to  be  given  up,  there  is  other  evidence  that  the 
Pentateuch  was  reverenced  among  the  Ten  Tribes.  This  is 
evident  from  the  historical  account  of  the  schism ;  from  the 
lives  of  the  prophets,  Elijah,  Elisha,  etc.,  and  from  Hosea  and 
Amos.  From  these  latter  two  books,  it  incidentally  appears 
that  the  ceremonial  service  of  the  Pentateuch  continued  among 
the  Ten  Tribes  through  all  their  apostasy.  Its  laws,  festivals 
and  prescriptions ;  even  its  technical  terms  and  phrases,  were 
minutely  adhered  to.  Only  changes  required  by  idolatry  were 
introduced.  The  denunciations  of  the  prophets  imply  that  this 
idolatry  was  a  known  apostasy  from  the  true  worship  6f  God. 
In  addition  to  allusions  to  the  Hitual,  the  knowledge  of  certain 
historical  facts  is  presupposed.  Take  for  example,  Hosea — in 
regard  (a)  to  the  ceremonial,  it  is  seen  2:  11,  and  9 :  5,  that  the 
anqual  feasts.  Sabbaths,  and  festivals,  were  observed,  and 
retained  their  legal  names :  in  12 :  9,  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles 
is  referred  to.  The  place  of  holding  it,  (and  in  one  instance, 
the  time),  is  changed,  but  the  institution  itself  remains  the 
same.  The  day  of  the  month  is  also  unaltered.  The  festival 
was  held,  1  Kings,  12 :  27-33,  in  the  eighth  month,  instead  of 
the  seventh,  as  the  law  required ;  for  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles, 
or,  as  it  is  called  in  Ex.  23  :  16,  the  "  Feast  of  Ingathering," 
was  more  properly  held  at  a  later  date  in  the  north  than  in  the 
south,  where  the  harvest  was  earlier ;  and  also,  by  so  doing, 
Jeroboam  seemed  to  consult  the  convenience  of  the  people.     His 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  49 

real  design,  however,  was  to  wean  the  hearts  of  the  people  away 
from  king  of  Judah.  The  sacrificial  offerings  were  also  retained. 
Thus,  the  drink  offering  is  referred  to  in  8  :  13  ;  9  :  4,  etc. ;  the 
sin  oflFering,  in  4:8.  Again,  Hosea  4 :  4,  (viz. :  that  a  man 
must  not  strive  with  a  priest),  is  an  allusion  to  Deut.  17 :  8-13. 
See  4  :  4  for  the  law  of  clean  and  unclean,  {h)  With  regard  to 
prophetic  denunciations,  see  4:  13;  8:  11;  12:  11;  where  the 
erection  of  many  altars  is  denounced.  This  tendency,  although 
apparently  a  good  token  to  any  one  unacquainted  with  the  law, 
was  really  a  violation  of  the  unity  of  the  sanctuary,  which  that 
law  required.  Hosea  says  the  people  had  a  long  written  law 
(8 :  12),  and  not  merely  the  specific  commandments.  For  the 
expression  in  our  version  is,  "  I  have  written  unto  him  the 
great  things"  {i.  e.,  the  multitudes)  "of  My  law."  The  K'ri 
reads,  "  the  ten  thousand  things  of  My  law."  Looking  at  the 
context,  V.  11  reads,  "  because  Ephraim  hath  made  many  altars 
to  sin,  altars  shall  be  unto  him  to  sin."  Then  in  v.  12  it  states 
that  in  spite  of  this,  "  I  have  written  to  him  the  great  things  of 
My  law,  but  they  were  counted  as  a  strange  thing."  Therefore, 
v.  13,  the  sacrifices  so  offered  are  only  so  much  flesh  used  as 
ordinary  food.  Other  ceremonial  regulations  are  referred  to : 
as  the  moving  of  a  neighbor's  landmarks,  in  5  :  10 ;  the  muz- 
zling of  the  ox  that  treadeth  out  the  corn  [Deut.  25:  4],  in 
10:  11;  God  is  the  protector  of  the  fatherless  [22:  23],  in 
14  :  3,  etc.  (c)  The  knowledge  of  facts  contained  in  the  Penta- 
teuch is  presupposed  by  Hosea;  e.  g.,  in  1:  10,  the  blessing 
recorded  in  Genesis  22 :  17,  and  32 :  12  is  repeated ;  again, 
11 :  8  refers  to  the  destruction  of  the  cities  of  the  plain  ;  12  :  3 
and  4,  to  Jacob's  prevailing  over  the  angel ;  12  :  12,  to  Jacob's 
flight  into  Syria;  to  the  bringing  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt,  in 
11:  14  and  15;  12:  9;  13:  4  and  5 ;  to  Israel's  return  into 
Egypt,  9:3;  to  the  sin  of  Baalpeor,  in  9  :  10;  to  the  worship 
of  the  calves,  in  8 :  5  and  6.  This  latter  was  probably  an  imi- 
tation of  the  golden  calf  worship  inaugurated  by  Aaron.  See 
1  Kings  12  :  33  and  Exodus  32  :  4  and  8.  The  places  for 
setting  up  the  calves  were  chosen  not  from  their  convenience, 
but  because  they  were  such  as  ancient  association  with  the 

7 


50  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

Patriarchs  had  rendered  sacred,  e.  g.,  Bethel,  where  God 
appeared  three  times  to  Jacob.  This  Hosea  calls  (4 :  15,) 
not  the  "  house  of  God,"  but  the  "  house  of  wickedness."  In 
12  :  11,  there  is  an  allusion  to  Gilead,  spoken  of  in  Gen.  31 :  48  ; 
and  to  Gilgal,  where  the  stones  taken  out  of  the  Jordan  where 
pitched,  and  which  event  is  recorded  in  Joshua  4 :  20.  {d) 
These  allusions  to  the  laws  and  historical  facts  are  re-enforced 
by  forms  of  thought  and  speech,  drawn  from  the  Pentateuch. 
Many  of  the  ideas  expressed  are  evidently  suggested  by  and 
based  upon  the  Pentateuch.  Indeed  Hosea  would  have  been 
quite  obscure  to  the  people  if  they  had  not  possessed  the  Pen- 
tateuch. What  has  been  said  of  Hosea  applies  with  equal 
truth  to  Araos.  Like  proofs  of  genuineness  and  existence  of 
the  Pentateuch  may  be  drawn  from  the  histories  of  Elijah  and 
Elisha,  and  of  the  schism.  Consult  Hengstenberg.  That  these 
prophets  were  tolerated  in  denouncing  the  national  worship  is  a 
proof  that  the  public  conscience  confessed  that  they  were  right. 
The  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  is  everywhere  admitted,  and 
especially  was  it  so  at  the  time  of  the  schism.  Hence  it  must 
be  what  it  claims  to  be. 

IV.  The  various  positive  arguments  already  stated  may  be 
supplemented  by  certain  negative  ones.  The  institutions  and 
primeval  history  of  the  0.  T.  are  complete  from  the  time  of 
Moses.  There  is  no  trace  in  its  history,  poetry  or  prophecy, 
of  their  subsequent  adoption  or  growth.  If  the  Pentateuch  be 
not  the  genuine  production  of  Moses ;  if  its  laws  were  not 
originated  by  him,  and  if  its  histories  were  not  recorded  by 
him  and  given  to  the  people  as  a  whole,  then  the  only  alterna- 
tive is  that  these  institutions  represent  the  growth  of  centuries. 
That  such  a  body  of  laws  could  have  been  imposed  upon  the 
people,  unless  in  the  time  of  Moses,  is  absurd.  But  according 
to  this  view,  the  Pentateuch  was  written  at  a  late  period  long 
posterior  to  Moses,  and  falsely  imputed  everything  therein 
recorded,  including  the  code  of  that  time,  to  the  great  legisla- 
tor. On  this  hypothesis,  the  history  in  the  Pentateuch  ceases 
to  be  the  record  of  Moses  as  an  eye  witness,  but  is  found  to  be 
made  up  of  myths  and  fictions,  so  interblended  that  the  real 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  51 

cannot  be  distinguished  from  the  fanciful.  And  all  this,  the 
later  writer  of  the  Pentateuch  assumed  to  be  true.  This  view 
cannot  be  sustained.  We  have  a  compact  connected  history, 
together  with  a  complete  literature,  reaching  back  to  the  time 
of  Moses.  There  is  no  trace  of  a  gradual  formation  of  these 
institutions.  In  the  laws  and  myths  of  Greece  and  Eome,  it  is 
otherwise.  They  are  always  simplest  in  their  earlier  forms. 
But  the  Mosaic  institutions  and  narratives  are  always  complete 
and  entire,  and  references  imply  that  they  always  existed  in 
that  form  in  which  the  Pentateuch  records  them.  The  only 
thing  supporting  a  contrary  theory  is  derived  from  those  periods 
of  apostasy  among  the  people,  when  these  institutions  were  dis- 
regarded. That  they  were  not  observed  is  no  proof  that  they 
did  not  exist.  And  besides  history  relates  that  the  people 
forsook  the  institutions  of  their  fathers,  , 

V.  There  is  no  period  in  the  history  of  Israel,  subsequent  to 
the  time  of  Moses,  to  which  such  a  work  as  the  Pentateuch  can 
be  referred.  It  could  not  have  been  written  (a)  in  the  weak- 
ness and  dissolution  of  the  period  of  the  Judges.  It  could  not 
have  been  brought  into  existence  in  such  a  time  of  anarchy,  for 
the  age  was  opposite  in  character  to  that  which  the  Pentateuch 
exhibits.  Nor  could  it  have  been  produced  {b)  in  the  days  of 
Solomon  and  David,  for  we  have  full  histories  of  that  period, 
and  the  state  of  things  then  existing  does  not  correspond  with 
what  is  recorded  in  the  Pentateuch.  Besides  the  plan  of  the 
temple  erected  by  Solomon  does  not  correspond  exactly  with 
the  tabernacle  of  Moses.  Further,  David  introduced  certain 
changes  regarding  the  courses  of  the  priesthood,  and  the  singers 
of  the  temple.  Hence  we  see  the  sanctuary,  here  spoken  of,  is  not 
a  transcript  of  that  in  the  Pentateuch.  If  it  originated  during 
the  exile,  it  could  not  have  been  introduced  into  Judah  (c)  while 
the  schism  lasted,  for  then  the  Ten  Tribes  would  not  have 
received  it;  nor  could  it  have  arisen  {d)  during  the  Babylonish 
exile,  for  that  was  no  time  to  attempt  a  National  reconstruction 
when  the  people  were  in  an  enemy's  land ;  nor  was  it  (e)  after 
the  exile,  because  their  zeal  on  their  return  was  not  for  new 
institutions  but  for  old.     It  was  a  period  of  reformation — a- 


52  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

return  to  the  faith  of  former  days.  Ezra  merely  recalled  the 
people  to  the  institution  of  their  fathers,  and  Luther  might  as 
well  be  said  to  have  written  the  Bible  as  Ezra  to  have  written 
the  Pentateuch.  The  difficulty  of  accounting  for  the  Penta- 
teuch's origin,  if  it  was  not  written  by  Moses,  is  insuperable. 
Objectors  too  must  show  that  there  are  fewer  difficulties  in  the 
way  of  its  being  written  at  some  later  date. 

VI.  To  these  arguments  add  the  inspired  and  infallible  testi- 
mony of  Christ  and  His  Apostles  in  the  N.  T.  Christ  says 
"  Moses  wrote  of  Me,"  and  He  said  to  the  Jews,  John  5  :  47,  "  if 
ye  believe  not  Moses'  writings,  how  shall  ye  believe  My  word  ?" 
Numerous  passages  in  N.  T.  assert  or  imply  the  correctness  of 
the  popular  faith,  viz. :  that  Moses  was  the  author.  It  was  not 
the  aim  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles  to  teach  scientific  criticism, 
but  they  were  inspired  teachers  of  the  truth ;  and  to  authenti- 
cate the  Pentateuch,  if  it  were  really  spurious,  would  have  been 
to  prove  themselves  fallible. 

VII.  The  universal  belief  of  Jews  and  Christians  from  the 
earliest  period  to  the  present  day,  confirms  the  Mosaic  author- 
ship. There  is  no  rebutting  testimony.  The  doubts  advanced 
rest  on  no  basis  of  tradition,  but  on  a  skeptical  predetermina- 
tion not  .to  believe  in  the  reality  of  any  divine  revelation.  If 
the  Pentateuch  be  authentic,  then  the  opposite  must  follow  as 
a  consequence,  viz. :  that  there  are  real  prophecies  and  real 
miracles.  Hence,  skeptics  refuse  to  accept  the  Pentateuch. 
A  spirit  of  unbelief  in  an  immediate  and  supernatural  revela- 
tion lies  at  the  basis  of  the  whole  denial.  Hence,  these  objec- 
tions have  little  weight. 

VIII.  A  final  argument  may  be  drawn  from  the  entire  com- 
patibility of  the  Pentateuch,  as  a  whole  and  in  all  its  parts, 
with  the  circumstances  of  its  alleged  origin.  This  may  be  seen 
Ih  the  fact  that :  (a)  The  knowledge  of  writing  belonged  to 
the  time  of  Moses.  It  is  objected  that  this  art  was  not  known 
and  in  common  use  at  this  early  period,  and  that  the  matter  of 
the  book  could  never  have  been  remembered.  But  the  art  of 
writing  was  familiarly  known  in  Moses'  day.  It  was  not 
divinely  communicated  to  him  as  those  suggest,  who  hold  that 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  53 

God's  writing  the  commandments  upon  the  tables  of  stone  was 
the  first  recorded  instance  of  written  characters.  Egyptian 
and  other  monuments,  together  with  hints  in  the  Pentateuch 
itself,  prove  that  writing  was  even  ancient  in  the  days  of  Moses. 
(6)  The  language  of  the  Pentateuch  contains  certain  archaisms 
or  peculiarites  which  distinguish  it  from  the  Hebrew  of  later 
days.  Many  terms  used  in  the  Pentateuch,  are,  in  later  times, 
used  only  in  poetry.  It  is  objected  that  its  language  is  that  of 
the  time  of  Isaiah  or  even  later,  and  that  it  must  have  under- 
gone more  change  if  it  had  really  belonged  to  the  age  of  Moses. 
But  it  must  be  remembered  that  oriental  languages  are  very 
stable,  (c)  The  unity  and  harmony  of  the  law  as  shown  by 
the  careful  study  of  its  provisions.  It  composes  one  system, 
and  is  the  outgrowth  of  one  idea.  It  has  no  such  discordant 
parts  as  it  must  have  exhibited  if  produced  by  the  accretion 
of  many  minds  and  ages,  (d)  Its  Egyptian  relations,  viz. : 
Egyptian  words,  allusions  to  Egyptian  objects,  &c.  Many  of 
its  symbols  stand  related  to  Egyptian  customs  and  topics.  The 
writer  was  evidently  familiar  with  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  so 
were  the  people  to  whom  he  wrote,  (e)  Certain  prescriptions 
and  particulars  in  the  law  show  that  it  had  its  origin  in  the 
wilderness  and  not  in  the  settled  state  of  Canaan.  (/)  Some 
weight  is  to  be  given  to  external  or  profane  traditions,  e.  g., 
Manetho,  an  Egyptian  priest,  tells  of  the  church  in  Israel,  the 
circumstances  of  the  people  in  Egypt,  &c.,  &c. 


UNITY   OF   PENTATEUCH. 

Objections  to  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  affect : 
(1)  the  form,  i.  e.,  they  deny  its  unity,  alleging  that  it  is  not 
the  product  of  one  author  but  of  several ;  some  of  whom  were 
of  a  period  later  than  Moses,  and  therefore,  the  Pentateuch 
must  be  post-mosaic ;  (2)  the  contents,  i.  e.,  they  allege  that  the 
Pentateuch  contains  such  inaccuracies,  contradictions  and  ana- 
chronisms, that  it  cannot  be  the  work  of  one  author,  Moses. 

A.  As  to  unity.     In  its  present  form  the  Pentateuch  is  one 


54  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

continuous  work  of  one  author ;  this  assertion  does  not  deny 
that  there  may  have  been  written  sources  from  which  he  drew 
his  facts,  provided  the  composition  be  his  own.  These  facts, 
whether  from  preexisting  writings,  from  tradition,  from  per- 
sonal knowledge,  or  from  divine  revelation,  would  still  prove  its 
unity  if  moulded  by  Moses,  e.  g.,  Bancroft's  history  composed 
from  pre-existent  material,  yet  a  unit ;  if  it  were  a  mere  weaving 
together  of  separate  a,ccounts,  it  would  be  a  compilation ;  so, 
also,  a  gospel  history  might  be  composed  from  the  language  of 
the  four  evangelists. 

The  question  is  whether  the  Pentateuch  is  a  continuous  pro- 
duction of  a  single  author  or  the  product  of  various  authors 
woven  together  and  which  can  be  taken  apart  without  destroy- 
ing unity.  The  conjecture  of  ante-Mosaic  records  is  ancient, 
but  hypotheses  which  deny  unity  of  Pentateuch  and  assert  that 
it  is  a  mere  compilation  from  these  ante-Mosaic  records  are  of 
modern  date.  These  hypotheses  are,  I.  Documentary,  11.  Frag- 
mentary, III.  Supplementary. 

I.  The  Documentary  Hypothesis, — Which  supposes  two  separ- 
ate documents  written  by  two  distinct  authors,  supported  by  the 
following  arguments  :  1.  The  singular  interchange  and  alternate 
use  of  names  Jehovah  and  Elohim  in  successive  sections,  e.  g.,  in 
Gen.  1-2  :  3,  Elohim  alone  is  used ;  in  chap.  2  :  4-3,  Jehovah- 
Elohim;  in  chap.  4,  Jehovah;  in  chap.  5,  Elohim;  chap. 
6  :  1-8,  Jehovah  ;  chap.  6  :  9-22,  Elohim,  &c.  2.  The  alleged 
fact  is  that  if  Elohist  be  taken  out,  they  would  form  a  complete 
and  unbroken  narrative ;  the  same  affirmed  less  confidently  of 
Jehovist  sections.  3.  Alleged  existence  of  parallel  sections  in 
Jehovist  and  Elohist  documents,  e.  g.,  in  Gen.  1-2 :  3,  Elohist 
gives  account  of  creation,  and  in  next  section  chap.  2 :  4,  Jeho- 
vist gives  a  new  account  of  same  thing ;  in  Gen.  6  :  1-8,  Jeho- 
vist gives  account  of  flood  and  wickedness  of  man,  and  purpose 
to  destroy  him  ;  in  chap.  6  :  9,  Elohist  gives  same  account,  but 
adds  command  to  Noah  to  enter  the  ark;  in  chap.  7:  1-5, 
Jehovist  repeats  this  command.  4.  Alleged  diversity  of  style, 
diction,  ideas  and  aim  in  these  two  documents.  It  is  said  that 
examination  shows  that  each  section  has  distinguishing  charac- 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  55 

teristics :  (1)  Diversity  of  style.  Elohist  uses  the  phrase 
"  beast  of  the  earth,"  Jehovist  "  beast  of  the  field.  Elohist  says 
God  "created"  man,  Jehovist  says  "formed."  Elohist  uses 
the  words  "  male  and  female,"  Jehovist  "  man  and  his  wife." 
(2)  Diversity  in  range  of  ideas.  Jehovist  said  to  show  fond- 
ness for  recording  details  of  history  which  seem  preparatory 
to  Mosaic  ritual,  while  Elohist  gives  merely  general  historical 
features,  Jehovist  mentions  sacrifices  of  Cain  and  Abel.  Elo- 
hist speaks  of  Enoch  and  Noah  walking  with  God,  but  does  not 
mention  sacrifices.  Jehovist  in  reeording  the  taking  of  animals 
into  the  ark,  distinguishes  between  the  clean  and  unclean. 
Elohist  gives  the  account  in  more  general  terms.  Jehovist 
records  Noah's  sacrifice. 

These  four  arguments,  as  at  first  propounded,  did  not  conflict 
with  Mosaic  authorship  of  Pentateuch,  and  were  at  first  con- 
fined to  Gen.  Astruc  first  suggested  this  theory.  Eichhorn 
adopted  it.  Both  still  held  Mosaic  authorship.  This  hypothesis 
soon  extended  to  remainder  of  Pentateuch,  and  then  first  con- 
flicted with  Mosaic  authorship.  If  the  later  books  of  Penta- 
teuch could  thus  be  compounded  of  separate  documents,  these 
documents  must  have  been  prior  to  the  time  of  Moses,  or  the 
Pentateuch  must  have  been  produced  after  the  time  of  Moses, 
and  hence  he  could  not  have  been  its  author.  If  supposable 
that  these  original  documents  could  have  been  produced  at  the 
time  of  Moses,  it  is  unlikely  that  a  third  history  would  have 
been  written.  Delitzsch  adopts  this  hypothesis  and  supposes 
that  Pentateuch  was  put  in  its  present  form  in  the  time  of 
Joshua,  and  was  compiled  from  two  histories,  written  in  Moses' 
lifetime,  one  of  them  perhaps  written  by  Moses.  Kurtz  follows 
Delitzsch,  but  says  that  the  compilation  itself  was  made  in 
Moses'  lifetime. 

The  establishment  of  this  hypothesis  as  thus  extended  to 
whole  Pentateuch  would  be  a  confutation  of  Mosaic  authorship  ; 
all  we  could  say  would  be  that  certain  parts  were  written  by 
Moses. 

To  support  this  hypothesis,  appeal  is  made  to  Exodus  6 :  3, 
which  it  is  alleged  proves  that  the  name  Jehovah  was  not  used 


56  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

in  the  time  of  patriarchs,  and  was  first  used  in  days  of  Moses, 
and,  therefore,  the  Jehovist  document  is  not  prior  to  time  of 
Moses ;  they  say  Jehovist  document  is  post-Mosaic,  because  it 
contains  anachronism  in  putting  into  mouths  of  patriarchs  a 
name  not  known  in  their  day.  This  anachronism  led  to  suspi- 
cion of  others.  Jehovist  document  mentions  sacrifices  (chiefly 
of  patriarchs)  which  belong  to  Mosaic  economy;  it  was  sus- 
pected that  Jehovist  had  thus  transferred  to  that  age  what  was 
current  in  his  day.     The  Elohist  was  more  accurate. 

These  diversities  took  on,  more  and  more,  the  character  of 
contraditions,  as  one  or  other  of  the  authors  was  held  in  most 
esteem.  The  text  was  tortured  to  bring  forth  difficulties  ;  par- 
allel passages  were  greatly  multiplied  and  points  of  resemblance 
shown  to  be  identical  passages.  Diversities  were  magnified 
into  contradictions,  e.  g.,  in  the  genealogy  of  Cain,  Gen.  4 :  17- 
22,  a  Jehovist  section,  the  names  are  similar  to  those  in  the  list 
of  Seth's  descendants  in  Gen.  5,  an  Elohist  section.  Said  that 
these  are  only  varying  accounts  of  the  same  genealogy.  So  in 
Gen.  12,  Jehovist  records  Abraham's  prevarications  about 
Sarah,  and  says  it  occurred  in  Egypt.  In  Gen.  20,  Elohist 
relates  same  story,  but  says  it  occurred  in  Gerar.  In  chap.  26, 
Jehovist  relates  same  story,  but  says  Isaac  and  not  Abraham. 
In  chap.  21 :  21  and  22,  Elohist  records  altercation  between 
Abimelech  and  Abraham.  In  chap.  26  :  17-33,  Jehovist 
records  same,  but  says  Isaac  and  not  Abraham. 

This  destructive  course  at  length  reacted  on  itself.  Docu- 
ments themselves  examined,  and  it  was  found :  a  That  like 
repetitions  occurred  in  each  distinct  document,  b  That  like 
contradictions  occurred  in  each.  It  was  found  impossible  to 
fix  diflerent  criteria  of  style  so  that  they  could  be  distinguished 
throughout,  e.  g.,  characteristics  of  one  author  would  be  found 
in  the  other.  Attempts  to  settle  age,  aim,  style,  &c.,  of  each 
resulted  difi'erently  in  difierent  parts  of  the  same  document. 
The  only  conclusion  was  that  the  documents  themselves  were 
separable,  and  the  work  of  difierent  authors.  Some  supported 
two  Elohist  and  one  Jehovist.  DeWette  supposes  several 
difierent   writers.     The   division    thus   became   infinite.     The 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  67 

documentary   hypothesis    was   given    up,  and  displaced   by  a 
second  hypothesis,  viz. : 

//.  The  Fragmentary  Hypothesis. — This  is  the  documentary 
hypothesis  run  mad.  It  supposes  that  every  separate  para- 
graph has  a  distinct  author  and  is  a  fragment  taken  from  more 
extended  writings  ;  two  or  more  fragments  may  have  been  from 
the  same  source.  This  hypothesis  also  extensively  adopted  : 
same  arguments  used  as  in  documentary,  only  more  vigorously 
applied.  No  limit  to  its  application  ;  has  been  applied  to  Judges 
and  might  be  to  any  work,  ancient  or  modern.  In  addition  to 
the  arguments  in  support  of  documentary  hypothesis,  they  refer 
to  the  titles  and  subscriptions  found  in  these  different  sections 
in  Pentateuch,  e.  g.,  titles,  Gen.  2  :  4,  Gen.  5  :  1,  Ex.  6  :  16,  Lev. 
7  :  1,  Lev.  11 :  1,  Num.  3  :  1,  Num.  33  :  1,  Deut.  1:1;  subscrip- 
tions, Gen.  10 :  32;  46  :  15,  18,  22,  Lev.  7  :  37,  38,  Lev.  11 :  46, 
Lev.  13 :  59.  These  mark  beginnings  and  ends  of  paragraphs, 
but  they  never  prove  that  these  sections  are  independent  or  had 
separate  authors.  These  titles  and  subscriptions  are  attached 
(1)  to  genealogies,  (2)  to  laws  forming  sections  complete  in 
themselves ;  they  merely  tend  to  clearness  and  form  connecting 
links,  e.  g.,  Num.  1  :  5,  Gen.  10  :  1,  sometimes  preceded  by 
"  and  "  Gen.  46  :  1,  8;  36  :  1 ;  26  :  1.  There  are  ten  of  these  in 
Genesis  forming  a  series,  each  referring  back  to  a  previous  his- 
tory, and  thus  making  an  unbroken  line.  This  cannot  be  acci- 
dental, and  indicates  one  author.  Gen.  6:9;  10  :  1 ;  11 :  10  ; 
11 :  27;  25  :  12;  25  :  19;  36  :  1,  distinguished  by  separate  titles. 
Gen.  19  :  37;  22  :  20;  25  :  1,  not  so  distinguished.  The  number 
ten  seems  intentional,  for  like  stress  given  to  it  elsewhere,  e.g., 
10  commandments,  10  acts  of  creation,  10  generations  from 
Adam  to  Noah,  and  from  Noah  to  Abraham. 

In  reference  to  this  hypothesis  we  remark,  1.  It  may  be 
regarded  as  a  reductio  ad  absurdum  of  the  partition  theory. 
2,  This  principle  might  be  applied  to  any  works  with  like 
destructive  result.  3.  It  requires  an  assumption  of  an  unsup- 
posable  amount  of  literature  at  the  time  of  the  composition  of 
Pentateuch.  No  facts  to  support  this  theory  ;  no  fragments  of 
these  lost  books  extant,  nor  any  allusion  to   them.     Author  of 

8 


58  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

Chronicles  did  not  know  of  their  existence.  No  formula  of 
quotation  from  these  ancient  books  in  Pentateuch,  except  Num. 
21 :  14.  4.  Impossible  to  form  so  large  a  work  as  Pentateuch 
from  so  many  books,  in  such  a  continuous  narrative  and  so 
complete  in  its  plan.  No  instance  of  such  compilation  in  history 
of  literature.  In  oriental,  successive  portions  are  more  loosely 
connected  than  in  modern.  Pentateuch  a  complete  whole;  no 
variation  of  thought ;  no  abrupt  transitions  ;  seeming  omissions 
are  not  breaks,  but  omissions  of  irrelevant  matter.  5.  There 
are  such  allusions  and  cross  references  from  one  part  of  Penta- 
teuch to  another,  that  the  writer  must  have  known  of  the  para- 
graphs alluded  to. 

Those  who  deny  the  Unity  of  Pentateuch  are  now  compelled 
to  shift  their  ground  and  resort  to  another  hypothesis,  viz. : 

III.  The  Supplementary  Hypothesis. — A  modification  of 
Documentary  in  the  direction  of  closer  union ;  a  reaction  in 
the  right  direction.  This  hypothesis  retains  theory  of  Jehovist 
and  Elohist,  but  they  are  not  made  to  be  authors  of  distinct 
and  independent  documents.  It  supposes  the  Elohist  to  have 
made  an  original  history  constituting  a  groundwork,  then  this 
history  was  adopted  and  enlarged  by  Jehovist,  retaining  the 
language  and  form  of  this  older  book,  supplying  omissions  and 
introducing  sections  of  his  own  as  he  thought  necessary. 

This  provides  for  evidences  of  unity  in  both  Elohist  and 
Jehovist  passages  by  themselves ;  it  also  accounts  for  the  fact 
that  Jehovist  sections  are  related  to  those  of  the  Elohist,  pre- 
supposing and  containing  allusions  to  them.  The  Jehovist  is 
supposed  to  have  the  Elohist  document  in  his  hand.  The 
hypothesis  fails  (1)  because  it  cannot  account  for  allusions  to 
Jehovist  passages  by  the  Elohist,  since  the  hypothesis  supposes 
that  Elohist  wrote  before  Jehovist.  It  is  impossible  to  deter- 
mine what  the  Jehovist  intends  to  do ;  the  proof  lies  in  the 
diversity  of  style  and  thought  in  the  two  writings ;  Jehovist 
must  therefore  retain  the  language  of  Elohist  and  expresses  his 
own  ideas  in  his  own  style  and  language  where  he  thinks  neces- 
sary. Frequently  ideas  and  diction  said  to  belong  to  one,  are 
found  in   the  other.      Elohist  sections  are  found  to   contain 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  59 

language,  views  and  opinions  expressed  in  Jehovist ;  inference 
is  that  Jehovist  has  interpolated  in  these  places.  Again,  char- 
acteristics said  to  belong  to  Elohist  are  found  in  Jehovist 
passages  ;  here  it  is  said  that  Jehovist  imitates  Elohist.  Again 
there  are  passages  in  which  it  is  impossible  to  mark  the  divi- 
sion ;  here  it  is  said  Jehovist  uses  artifice  to  cover  up  his  addi- 
tions so  skillfully  that  the  points  of  connection  cannot  be 
discerned.  All  these  explanations  are  subterfuges  to  evade  the 
difficulty  which  they  create.  It  is  bringing  unproved  hypothe- 
ses to  support  hypotheses.  (2)  It  makes  Jehovist  inconsistent 
with  himself;  in  one  place  the  sections  are  skillfully  connected, 
in  another  not  connected  at  all ;  he  is  at  the  same  time  skillful 
and  bungling,  artless  and  artful,  an  honest  reporter  and  a  dis- 
honest interpolater.  This  hypothesis  has  been  variously  modi- 
fied, but  remains  essentially  the  same.  The  arguments  adduced 
in  its  support  are  the  same  as  those  given  to  support  the 
documentary. 

1.  The  alleged  alternation  of  the  names  Elohim  and  Jehovah. 
So  far  as  this  is  remarkable,  it  is  confined  almost  entirely  to 
Genesis  and  chiefly  to  earlier  parts  of  that  book.  But  same 
writer  might  use  both  names ;  they  are  intermingled  in  almost 
every  book  of  the  Bible.  It  is  here  alleged  (1)  that  the  names 
alternate  in  successive  sections.  Arts.  Impossible  to  divide  the 
sections  so  as  to  correspond  precisely  with  the  alleged  alterna- 
tion, for  both  names  are  constantly  cropping  out  in  each  section. 
This  destroys  the  whole  argument ;  hence,  if  the  name  Jehovah 
appears  in  Elohist  section,  and  vice  versa,  the  interchange  must 
depend  on  something  else  than  diversity  of  authorship.  To 
evade  this  it  is  said  that  Jehovist  introduces  the  name  Jehovah 
in  place  of  Elohim  in  Elohim  sections,  and  uses  both  names,  in 
either  section,  whenever  he  choses.  (2)  Appeal  is  made  to 
Exodus  6:3,  to  show  that  Elohist  avoids  using  the  name 
Jehovah,  until  the  time  of  Moses.  Ans.  (a)  Even  supposing  the 
name  Jehovah  to  have  been  first  used  at  the  time  of  Moses,  it 
might  still  be  used  in  recording  the  history  of  the  patriarchs. 
It  was  the  name  of  the  Being  whom  the  patriarchs  worshiped, 
and  the  writer  may  have  inserted  the  name  here,  as  showing 


60  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

the  identity  of  the  God  of  Abraham  with  the  God  who  led  the 
Israelites  from  Egypt.  In  the  same  way  we  speak  of  the  "  call 
of  Abraham,"  whereas  his  name  at  that  time  was  Abram  ;  so 
also  "  converson  of  Paul,"  instead  of  Saul.  (6)  This  is  the  only 
passage  adduced,  and  it  would  be  easier  to  erase  this  one  verse 
than  to  throw  out  so  many  sections  of  Genesis.  But  this  is 
unnecessary  because,  (c)  author  of  Pentateuch  in  writing  this 
verse  saw  no  contradiction  between  it  and  the  occurrence  of  the 
name  in  Genesis,  and  there  is  none,  because  {d)  the  verse  does 
not  assert  that  the  name  Jehovah  was  not  known,  but  that  God 
did  not  reveal  himself  in  the  character  denoted  by  that  name; 
its  meaning  was  to  be  unfolded  as  never  before.  The  whole 
reason  for  the  change  in  the  names  is  found  in  the  radical  dis- 
tinction in  their  import.  Elohim  is  the  general  name  for  God, 
derived  from  "  Alah,"  to  worship,  reverence.  It  is  also  applied 
to  heathen  divinities.  Jehovah,  derived  from  "  Hayah,"  to  be, 
belongs  to  the  true  God  alone;  it  is  a  proper  noun.  God 
reveals  himself  to  Israel,  by  this  name,  as  being  his  own 
covenant  people.  He  is  Jehovah  to  Israel  alone.  He  is  Elohim 
to  other  nations  also.  The  writers  of  0.  T.  use  the  names 
according  as  God  is  contemplated  in  one  or  other  point  of  view, 
e.  g.,  Genesis  14  :  18 ;  21 :  22 ;  41  :  38.  So  also  Israel  is  the 
sacred  name,  and  Jacob  the  ordinary  name  applied  to  Hebrew 
people. 

Hengstenberg,  Kurtz  and  others  have  pursued  this  subject 
through  Genesis  and  other  books  to  show  that  there  are  not 
different  writers,  but  only  discrimination  on  the  part  of  one 
writer  in  using  these  names.  The  names  being  different  in 
meaning  and  usage.  Hengstensberg's  theory  is  that  Elohim 
denotes  a  lower,  and  Jehovah  a  higher  stage  in  knowledge  and 
apprehension  of  God.  The  knowledge  advances  from  God  in 
creation,  to  Jehovah  at  Sinai,  and  in  the  interval  between  these 
two  extreme  periods,  He  may  be  designated  by  either ;  if 
writer  wished  to  use  a  more  glorious  name,  he  used  Jehovah. 

2.  The  alleged  fact  that  Elohim  sections  form  a  connected  whole 
when  Jehovist  sections  are  eliminated.  Ans.  This  alleged  con- 
tinuity is  only  held  by  those  who  have  a  theory  to  uphold  and 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  61 

is  not  well  founded:  (1)  Because  it  is  unwarrantable  to  suppose 
the  existence  of  a  chasm  by  the  removal  of  some  passage ;  the 
same  might  be  done  to  any  modern  book,  e.  g.,  Gen.  1,  i.s  Elohist 
section  giving  account  of  creation,  then  next  Elohist  section 
would  be  chap.  5  :  29,  making  no  allusions  to  any  change  in 
man's  condition.  He  speaks  of  the  ground  being  cursed. 
Next  Elohist  section  is  chap.  6 :  9.  But  all  this  requires  and 
presupposes  the  account  of  the  fall,  &c.,  which  is  given  by 
Jehovist  in  chap.  3.  The  whole  account  would  be  unintelligi- 
ble without  Jehovist  sections.  Same  might  be  shown  all 
through  the  Pentateuch.  (2)  This  alleged  continuity  is  in  part 
factitious,  for  the  authors  of  the  hypothesis  aimed  to  ascribe  to 
the  same  writer  what  appears  to  form  a  connected  narrative, 
but  some  of  the  discrepancies  occur  in  the  same  document. 

3.  The  alleged  existence  of  repetition  and  parallel  sections  in 
Jehovist  and  Elohist  documents.  This  is  no  proof  of  diversity 
of  authorship  because  (1)  many  of  these  are  not  parallel  pass- 
ages, but  narratives  of  distinct  events,  e.  g.,  Abraham  might 
have  prevaricated  twice,  and  Isaac  might  have  imitated  him. 
(2)  When  narratives  are  apparently  repeated,  it  is  merely  the 
same  event  viewed  in  a  different  aspect,  or  giving  a  different 
lesson.  (3)  Eepetition  and  enlargement  more  characteristic  of 
Hebrew  and  Oriental  writings,  than  of  our  own.  (4)  Like 
parallelisms  and  repetitions  occur  in  each  document  when  taken 
alone. 

4.  Alleged  diversity  of  style  and  ideas.  Two  given  sections 
are  compared,  and  then  the  comparison  extended  to  other  books. 
This  argument  from  diversity  of  style  is  plausible  but  fallacious. 
(1)  Because  this  difference  is  first  created,  and  then  argued 
from.  (2)  The  proofs  are  factitious,  and  might  be  applied  to 
any  book.  Words  found  in  one  section  are  singled  out  and 
shown  to  be  wanting  in  another ;  this,  however,  proves  nothing 
unless  it  can  be  shown  that  the  writer  had  occasion  to  use  these 
words.  Where  words  occur  two  or  three  times  in  one  and  not 
in  another  section,  it  is  accidental,  e.  g.,  twelve  out  of  thirteen 
of  the  poetic  passages  are  assigned  to  the  Jehovist.  This  falla- 
cious, because  the  writer  would  naturally  use  poetic  words  in 


62  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

these  sections,  not  found  elsewhere  in  prose.  (3)  When  synony- 
mous expressions  occur  to  express  one  idea,  it  is  not  to  be 
referred  to  diversity  of  style  or  authorship,  but  may  arise  from 
the  nature  of  the  subject  and  aspect  in  which  it  is  viewed. 
The  choice  of  words  is  determined  by  appropriateness ;  synonyms 
are  never  exactly  equivalent.  (4)  Alleged  criteria  of  style  fre- 
quently conflict  with  each  other,  or  with  criteria  alleged  from 
use  of  divine  names.  Critics  say  predominating  criteria  must 
prevail,  but  they  differ  as  to  what  criteria  do  predominate,  and 
the  occurrence  of  opposite  criteria  destroys  their  argument. 
They  in  vain  resort  to  assumption  of  interpolation  or  imitation 
of  the  Elohist  by  Jehovist.  (5)  What  has  been  said  of  style  is 
applicable  to  ideas  said  to  characterize  one  or  other  section  : 
(a)  The  difference  is  factitious ;  first  created,  and  then  argued 
from.  (6)  Since  there  is  distinction  between  fundamental  mean- 
ing and  current  usage  of  the  divine  names,  one  is  more  appro- 
priate in  certain  cases  than  the  other.  Natural,  therefore,  that 
one  of  these  names  will  be  found  associated  with  a  difierent 
class  of  ideas  from  the  other,  e.  g.,  Jehovah  associated  with 
sacrifice,  (c)  Alleged  that  anticipations  of  Mosaic  law  are  char- 
acteristic of  Jehovist;  but  these  same  are  found  in  Elohist 
sections,  e.  g.,  allusions  to  sacrifice,  altars,  angel  of  God,  vows, 
&c.,  Gen.  46  :  1 ;  35  :  1,  7 ;  21:17;  22  :  11-15.  Some  exclude 
these  passages  because  these  ideas  are  not  characteristic  of 
Elohist,  but  see,  also,  Gen.  35  :  1,  7,  9  ;  17  :  1-22 ;  35  :  15  ;  28  : 
20-22.  (d)  Elohist  goes  beyond  Jehovist  in  some  particulars, 
e.^.,Gen.2:  3;  9:  4;  17:  22-27;  35:  3,14.  (e)  While  Jehovist 
does  record  facts  in  Patriarchal  times,  anticipating  Mosaic 
ritual,  he  also  records  facts  at  variance  with  it,  Gen.  4 :  38 ;  8 : 
12-36;  20:  12;  29:  23-28.  Also  said  that  Jehovist  embellished 
narrative,  but  he  also  records  faults.  (/)  Mosaic  legislation 
could  not  have  been  wholly  new.  Must  expect  writer  to  record 
current  usage.  Presumption,  therefore,  is  in  favor  of  accuracy 
of  these  correspondences,  (g)  Critics  bring  forward  only  what  is 
favorable  to  their  hypothesis,  ignoring  all  else. 

These  various  hypotheses  exhaust  the  possibilities  of  the  case. 
One  or  other  of  the  three  is  the  only  way  to  account  for  any 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  G3 

theory,  except  that  the  Pentateuch  is  the  work  of  one  author. 
Any  hypothesis  must  be  mere  conjecture,  unless  unity  of  Pen- 
tateuch is  shown  to  be  impossible  or  absurd. 

These  hypotheses  although  baseless,  have  done  good.  (1) 
They  prove  that  the  alleged  partition  of  Pentateuch  is  impos- 
sible. (2)  They  prove  positively  that  it  is  a  unit.  (3)  These 
investigations  have  resulted  in  elucidation  and  vindication  of 
Pentateuch  by  careful  analysis. 


XII.    CONTENTS   UNMOSAIC. 

It  is  alleged — 

1.  There  are  false  and  incredible  statements. 

2.  Contradictions. 

3.  Anachronisms. 

These  statements  concern — 

(1)  Matters  of  inferior  moment. 

(2)  Their  combined  presentation  exaggerates  the  importance 

of  their  number  and  strength ;  they  are  apt  to  be 
counted  rather  than  weighed.  There  are  advantages 
in  considering  them  in  their  proper  place  in  the  con- 
secutive study  of  each  book. 

(3)  Difficulties  are  frequently  created  by  our  own  ignorance. 

(4)  Positive  proofs  of  Mosaic  authorship  must  not  be  left  out 

of  view. 

(5)  Even  if  it  could  be  shown  that  a  few  passages  were  not 

from  the  pen  of  Moses,  this  would  not  discredit  his 
authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  as  a  whole. 

Interpolations  are  found  in  many  ancient  books ;  these  may 
have  been  authoritatively  supplied  by  Ezra.  Yet  they  are  not 
to  be  admitted  without  necessity. 

Illustrate  from  Gen.  36 :  31,  "And  these  are  the  kings  that 
reigned  in  the  land  of  Edom,  before  there  reigned  any  king 
over  the  children  of  Israel."  The  kingdom  in  Israel  is  alluded 
to,  but  as  expected,  not  as  existing.  Moses  might  so  speak  of 
it,  for  it  was — 


64  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

1.  Promised  to  the  patriarchs,  (see  Gen.  17  :  6,  16 ;  35 :  11  ; 

49 :  10). 

2.  Again  by  Balaam,  (Num.  24  :  7,  17). 

3.  Provided  for  by  Moses,  (Deut.  17 :  14). 

4.  Involved  in  complete  national  organization. 

It  viras  natural  to  remark  that  Esau  had  kings,  and  Jacob 
the  heir  of  promise,  as  yet  had  none. 

There  is  nothing  to  show  that  the  kings  named  were  posterior 
to  the  Mosaic  age. 

Scientific  objections  afi"ect  inspiration  and  authority  of  Penta- 
teuch rather  than  its  Mosaic  authorship.  Though  these  are 
connected.  The  conflict  is  chiefly  in  the  first  seven  chapters  of 
Genesis  which  narrate  the  origin  of  the  world,  man,  nations, 
languages,  &c.  Contact  with  geology,  astronomy,  ethnology, 
philology,  chronology,  &c. 

1.  It  is  not  the  design  of  the  Bible  to  teach  or  anticipate 

physical  science. 

2.  Its  authority  is  independent  of  scientific  deductions,  rest- 

ing on  its  own  evidence. 

3.  The  Bible  is  the  Word  of  God,  physical  science  is  based 

on  His  works,  each  is  supreme  in  its  own  domain,  and 
neither  can  contradict  the  other. 

4.  Though  science  has  not  reached  its-  last  results,  enough  is 

already  ascertained  to  show  that  whatever  they  may 
be,  they  can  be  satisfactorily  harmonized  with  the 
Scripture. 


XIII.    ETHNOLOGICAL   REGISTER. 

Genesis  X. 

This  chapter  does  not  exhibit  relationship  of  individuals,  but 
of  nations. 

1.  Design  of  the  chapter,  as  seen  in  verses  5,  20,  31,  32. 

2.  Plural  and  Gentile  form  of  some  names,  (verses  13-18). 

3.  Others  occur  as  names  of  nations  or  communities.     Even 

such  as  are  individual  appear  here  as  ancestors  or  heads 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  65 

of  tribes  or  nations,  as  Canaan,  &c.  Other  Scripture 
examples  of  name  of  ancestor  given  to  tribe  or  nation 
springing  from  him.  Roman  and  Greek  mythical  per- 
sonages prove  antiquity  of  usage. 

4.  Otherwise  devoid  of  meaning  and  value. 

5.  Plan  of  Genesis  exhibits  divergent  lines  of  descent  before 

tracing  that  of  the  chosen  seed. 

6.  So  universally  understood. 

SOURCES. 

I.  Not  immediate  revelation. 

1.  Contrary  to  analogy  of  Scripture. 

2.  Of  other  Scriptural  genealogies. 
II.  Not  mythical. 

1.  No  inconsistencies  or  variations. 

2.  Not  local  or  national. 

It  is  alleged  there  is  a  tendency  to  exalt  Israel  as  descended 
from  the  eldest  son  of  Noah.     But — 

(1)  It  makes  all  men  brethren. 

(2)  It  is  a  question  whether  Shem  was  the  eldest,  10 :  21  is 

ambiguous ;  usual  order  of  names  not  decisive ;  com- 
pare 9  :  24;  5  :  32,  with  11 :  10.  Certainly  no  stress 
is  laid  on  his  primogeniture.  Compare  also  Isaac 
and  Jacob. 

(3)  Elam  and  Asshur,  10 :  22,  older  than  Arphaxad.     Pre- 

cisely seventy  names — a  symbolical  but  not  mythical, 
designed  yet  not  untruthful  correspondence  with  the 
number  of  Jacob's  family,  who  came  into  Egypt,  Gen. 
46:  27.  Referred  to  Deut.  32:  8;  seventy  elders, 
tradition,  New  Testament. 

III.  Not  scientific  deduction. 

IV.  Primeval  family  registers  and  national  tradition. 

AGE. 

1.  Internal  grounds  not  adequate  to  determine. 

2.  Most  probable  period  of  preparation,  Knobel  says  was  in 

the  time  of  Solomon.     That  of  Moses  better. 


66 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 


INCIDENTAL   PEOOFS   OF   ANTIQUITY. 

3.  Its  position  in  Genesis  is  uncontradicted.  Tiiere  are  diffi- 
culties in  interpretation,  arising  from  antiquity,  lack  of 
contemporaneous  information,  imperfection  of  other  and 
later  accounts,  change  of  names  and  location,  diversity 
of  language. 

AIDS. 

1.  Tradition. 

2.  Tenacity  of  names,  etymology. 

3.  Particulars  to  be  sought  for  under  generals.  The  unknown 

determined  by  what  is  known. 

XIV.     PLAN  AND  CONTENTS. 


History. 
Gen.  1-Ex.  19. 


Preliminary,    f  Antediluvian.    Gen.  1-5. 
Gen.  1-11.        [  Noachic.    Gen.  6-11. 

^  Family.    Gen.  i2_.50.  {  ^bf  ham,  Isaac  and 


Preparatory. 
Gen.  12-Ex.  19. 


Nation.  - 


■ (     Jacob. 

■  Transition  from  family. 

Ex.  1 : 1-7. 
Preparation  for  Exodus. 

Ex.  1 :  8-ch.  13. 
Exodus  and  March  to  Sinai. 

Ex.  14-19. 


r  Negative.    1 :  8-22.    Oppression. 

Preparation  for  Exodus.  J^  f  Instrument-Moses.      12-6. 

L  positive.   I  Plagues.    7-13. 


Legislation. 

Israel  in 
Wilderness. 

Ex.  20-Deut.  34. 


At  Sinai.        f  From  giving  Law  to  setting  up  Tab. 

J  Ex.  20-40. 

Ex.  20-  1   Ordinances  at  Sinai.    Lev.  1-27. 

Num.  10:10.   [  Preparation  lor  departure.  Num.  1-10:10. 


In  Paran. 
Num.  10:11- 

chap.  21. 


In  Plains  of 

MOAB. 

Deut.  1-34. 


From  Sinai  to  Kadesh.    10 :  11-14. 
Forty  years  wandering.    15-29. 
Kadesh  to  Plains  of  Moab.    20-36. 


Moses'  1st  Address,  (Historical),  1^ :  40. 
.d  (J.aw)  I  Special,  12-26. 


"      3d 
,  Conclusion,  31-34. 


(Blessing  and  Cursing). 
27-30. 


The  first  five  books  of  Moses  are  known  under  the  names, 
Law,  (Josh.  1 :  7),  Law  of  Moses,   (Josh.  8 :  32),  Pentateuch. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  67 

The  rabbinical  title  is  "  the  five-fifths  of  the  Law."  "  Penta- 
teuch "  is  from  the  Alexandrian  Greek,  nivze,  five,  and  reuxo'::, 
an  implement — book. 

The  five-fold  division  some  have  supposed  to  be  original  and 
as  old  as  Moses ;  a  natural  division  determined  by  plan  of  book. 
Others  think  that  the  division  was  from  the  Greek  translators. 
It  was  used  by  Josephus  and  Philo  and  is  found  in  the  LXX. 
The  titles  of  the  several  books  are  not  of  Hebrew  but  of  Greek 
origin.  The  Hebrew  names  are  merely  taken  from  the  first 
words  of  each  book,  and  in  the  first  instance  designate  only 
sections  and  not  books. 

The  Pentateuch  contains  six  hundred  and  sixty-nine  para- 
graphs, distinguished  into  open  and  closed.  Those  in  which  a 
new  line  opened  were  called  open ;  those  in  which  the  same  line 
after  an  interval  was  continued  were  said  to  be  closed.  The 
former  were  marked  with  a  "  pe  "  standing  in  the  open  space 
between  the  paragraphs,  the  latter  with  a  "  samech."  Besides 
these  paragraphs  was  a  division  into  verses.  It  was  also  divided 
into  fifty-four  larger  parashoth  or  lessons  for  reading  in  syna- 
gogue. The  present  division  into  chapters  originated  with  the 
Christians  in  13th  century,  is  ascribed  to  Cardinal  Hugo  by 
some,  by  others  to  Stephen  Langton,  Archb.  of  Canterbury. 


THEME. 

The  Pentateuch  has  one  theme — the  Theocracy  in  Israel. 
Two  parts : 

/.  Historical. — Tracing  the  steps  by  which  they  were  brought 
into  being  as  a  nation,  and  their  segregation  from  other 
nations,  (Gen.  1-Ex.  19). 
//.  Legislative. — Divine  Constitution  under  which  organized 
as  the  people  of  God,  (Ex.  20-Deut.  34). 

Part  I.     Historical. 

Of  the  two  main  sections,  the  first  is  not  only  precedent  to 
the  second,  but  preparatory  to  it.     For  though  in  the  latter  the 


68  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

history  is  insignificant  and  subordinate,  yet  it  is  allied  to  the 
first  because  the  history  itself  was  a  part  of  the  training. 

Everything  bears  on  the  theme. 

The  Historical  period  is  sub-divided  by  the  call  of  Abraham  : 

1.  Preliminary  period — Creation  to  call  of  Abraham,  (Gen. 

1-12). 

2.  Preparatory  period — Call  of  Abraham  to  end,  (Gen.  12- 

Ex.  19). 

The  Preliminary  Period  is  divided  by  the  flood  into  (a) 
Antediluvian ;  and  (6)  Noachie. 

The  failure  of  both  primeval  covenants  with  Adam  and  Noah, 
made  necessary  the  establishment  of  a  peculiar  people.  The 
covenant  with  Adam  was  broken  by  the  fall,  then  the  world 
was  destroyed  by  the  flood.  A  fresh  beginning  is  made — new 
covenant  enacted  with  Noah ;  this  is  followed  by  idolatry,  and 
again  there  appears  the  necessity  for  a  new  process.  Then  a 
call  is  made  to  Abraham,  and  he  is  separated  from  all  other  men 
to  be  the  father  of  a  peculiar  people. 

These  two  periods  furnish  the  justification  of  God's  establish- 
ing a  kingdom  in  Israel. 

This  separation  presents  the  ideas  of:  1,  Segregation.  2. 
Inward  character.  3.  Outward  destiny.  4.  Direct  relation  to 
God  of  Children  of  Israel. 

Preparatory  Period.  Gen.  12-Ex.  19.  Divided  into  the 
(1)  Family  stage ;  (2)  National  stage. 

(1)  Family  stage  embraces  the  period  of  patriarchs.  God 
chose  out  Abraham  and  covenanted  to  give  him — 

(a)  Numerous  seed. 

(6)  Canaan. 

(c)  To  make  him  a  blessing  to  all  mankind. 

During  this  period  the  work  of  separation  carried  on.  First, 
narrowed  down  to  the  family  of  Terah.  Abraham  called  out 
of  this  family.  Lot  parted  from  him  and  his  descendants 
traced.  Then  Ishmael  is  sent  away  (Gen.  21)  and  the  divergent 
lines  of  Ishmael  and  Keturah  (Gen.  25)  traced.  The  direct 
line  through  Isaac  traced  (Gen.  25 :  10,)  and  in  the  family  of 
Isaac  the  divergent  line  of  Esau,  (Gen.  36). 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  G9 

No  further  elimination  being  necessary,  the  history  of  the 
chosen  family  is  traced  in  the  land  of  Canaan  and  the  events 
which  led  them  to  Egypt. 

Genesis  closes  with  death  of  Jacob.  Family  period  ends  and 
National  begins. 

(2)  National  stages. 

EXODUS. 

Exodus  opens  with  the  multiplication  of  the  Children  of 
Israel.  Then  follows :  (1)  Preparation  for  the  Exodus,  (Ex. 
1 :  8  ;-13).     (2)  Exodus  and  March  to  Sinai,  Ex.  14-19. 

The  preparation  was  (a)  Negative,  (1:  8-22).  [h]  Positive. 
First,  in  choice  of  Moses  as  instrument,  (2-6) ;  second,  in 
breaking  the  bonds  by  plagues,  (7-13). 

These  having  taken  place  the  actual  Exodus  occurs,  (14-19). 

Israel  is  now  ready  to  be  organized,  therefore,  the  Historical 
period  closes  and  Legislative  opens. 


Part  II.     Legislative, 

Has  three  parts  corresponding  to  three  periods  and  three  dis- 
tinct localities  : 

(1)  Sinai,  period  one  year,  (Exodus  20 — Numbers  10 :  10). 

(2)  Wandering  in  Wilderness  of  Faran,  forty  years,  (Num- 

bers 12-21). 

(3)  Flains  of  Moah,  one  month,  (Deut.  1-34). 

At  Sinai  God  proclaims  the  Decalogue,  (Exodus  20),  then 
gives  ordinances  as  basis  for  the  covenant,  (21-23) ;  ratifies  the 
covenant,  (24). 

When  this  has  been  done  God  can  take  up  his  abode  with 
them,  hence  directions  for  building  the  tabernacle  are  given, 
(Exodus  25-31).  Execution  of  the  order  is  postponed  by  the 
sin  of  golden  calf,  (32-34),  requiring  a  renewal  of  the  covenant. 

Exodus  closes  with  an  account  of  the  actual  setting  up  of 
tabernacle. 


70  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

LEVITICUS. 

Next  the  Law  is  given,  mainly  in  Leviticus  : 

1.  Various  sacrifices,  (1-7). 

2.  Consecration  of  Aaron  and  his  sous,  and  death  of  Nadab 

and  Abihu  for  offering  strange  fire,  (8-10). 

3.  Law   of    clean   and    unclean    meats,    and    purifications, 

(11-15). 

4.  Services  of  Day  of  Atonement,  (16). 

These  are  followed  by  ordinances  for  the  people :  Miscella- 
neous, (17-20);  Priests,  (21-22);  Festivals,  (23);  Sabbatical 
year  and  year  of  Jubilee,  (25) ;  Blessings  and  Cursings,  (26) ; 
Supplementary  chapter,  (27). 

NUMBERS 

Begins  with  arrangements  for  the  camp  and  preparations  for 
march,  (1-10 :  10). 

People  first  numbered,  (chapter  1). 

Order  of  march,  (2). 

Duties  of  Levites  in  transporting  the  tabernacle,  (3-4). 

Ceremonial  regulations,  (5-6). 

Offerings  of  princes,  (7). 

Levites  consecrated,  (8). 

Passover  celebrated,  (9). 

Signal  trumpets  made,  (10). 

Actual  march  to  Kadesh  where  they  were  condemned  to 
v/andering,  (15-19). 

Assembly  at  Kadesh  on  the  first  month  of  fortieth  year,  and 
march  to  Plains  of  Moab,  (20-36). 

DEUTERONOMY 

Contains  last  addresses  of  Moses  in  eleventh  month  of  fortieth 
year  of  wandering.  He  endeavors  to  engage  the  people  to  a 
faithful  observance  of  the  law. 

1st  Address  [(1-4 :  40),  Historical  in  character.  Reviews 
the  march  and  argues  for  faithfulness. 

Between  this  and  second  address  is  recorded  the  selection  of 
three  Cities  of  Refuge  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  (4 :  41-49). 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  71 

2d  Address.  First  recapitulates  the  law  in  general  terms — 
recites  the  Decalogue,  (5-11),  then  enters  more  into 
detail,  (12-26). 

Sd  Address.     Consists  of  two  sections. 

(1)  Blessings  for  obedience,  curses  for  disobedience,  (27-28). 

(2)  Promises   on    condition    of    repentance    and    obedience, 

(29-30). 

Then  the  law  is  delivered  into  the  custody  of  the  Priests, 
Moses'  last  song  and  blessing,  and  death,  (31-34). 

Thus  the  Pentateuch  has  one  theme,  one  definite  plan,  one 
history ;  the  chasms  alleged  are  only  apparent  not  real  and 
necessary. 

Alleged  chasms  are  such,  e.  g.,  the  lives  of  the  Patriarchs  are 
given  minutely  while  a  large  part  of  the  four  hundred  and 
thirty  years  in  Egypt  are  passed  over  in  silence. 

Again,  the  escape  from  Egypt  is  given  minutely,  but  the 
forty  years  wandering  almost  a  blank. 

Reply.  These  periods  passed  over  so  lightly  are  unnecessary 
to  the  purpose  of  the  writer  in  giving  the  history.  He  only 
relates  what  belongs  to  the  development  of  the  children  of 
Israel  as  a  nation.  This  is  prima  facie  evidence  that  these 
books  are  from  a  single  hand  and  consistently  treated. 


NATURE  AND   DESIGN   OF   THE   MOSAIC 

LAW. 

It  is  not  a  civil  code — its  omissions.  Objection  from  this 
source.  The  divine  imposition  of  such  a  code  was  not  necessary 
nor  desirable. 

It  is  not  supplementary  civil  enactments.  1.  Many  of  its 
enactments  are  above  and  beyond  the  sphere  of  the  civil  mag- 
istrates. 2.  It  is  general,  not  specific.  3.  Its  penalties  and 
rewards  flow  directly  from  God. 

It  is  not  composed  of  distinct  codes,  political,  moral  and  cere- 
monial. Particulars  might  be  so  classified,  but  all  form  one 
law  of  God,  all  religious.     Kitual  worship  is  the  centre  of  the 


72  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

whole,  expressing  the  reciprocal  relations  of  God  and  man  in 
the  most  direct  manner. 

Objections  to  its  external  character  : 

1.  It  differs  from  N.  T.  only  in  degree. 

2.  The  forms  are  intended  to  express  and  foster  spiritual 

religion. 

3.  No  forms  of  prayer,  not  that  this  was  undervalued,  but 

not  to  fetter  utterances  of  the  heart. 

INTERPRETATIONS. 

I.  Materialistic.  Object :  1.  This  opposed  to  Moses'  teach- 
ing of  the  spirituality  of  God.  2.  It  destroys  religion.  3.  It 
degrades  it  beneath  the  heathen.  4.  It  was  not  so  understood 
by  the  people. 

II.  Ultra-typical,  immediate  and  sole  design  to  represent 
objects  of  the  N.  T.  It  is  typical.  1.  The  whole  0.  T.  is  so, 
and  this  part  especially.  2.  N.  T.  is  but  the  development  of 
0.  T.  3.  Express  statements  of  N,  T.  declare  it  to  be  typical. 
The  error  is  in  making  it  represent  objects  rather  than  truths, 
and  this  mostly  at  random  without  fixed  principles,  overlook 
design  for  people  of  0.  T. 

III.  Symbolic  of  religious  truths  or  ideas.  Similarity  to 
heathen  forms.  1.  Heathen  forms  not  borrowed  from  the 
Mosaic.  2.  Neither  is  the  Mosaic  borrowed  from  heathen.  3. 
Nor  yet  is  the  Mosaic  developed  out  of  the  heathen.  4.  But 
both  are  alike  symbolical  and  express  wants  of  human  nature, 
as  interpreted  by  God  and  by  man  himself. 

IV.  Kadical  principles  are  antagonistic.  The  ritual  of  0.  T. 
also  is  :  1.  A  barrier  of  intercommunication.  2.  Also  impos- 
ing and  attractive.  3.  It  carries  the  distinction  of  sacred  and 
profane  into  ordinary  matters.  4.  It  awakens  a  sense  of  sin. 
5.  It  is  a  yoke  of  bondage  and  thus  prepares  for  the  freedom 
of  the  Gospel. 


Book  of  Joshua. 


The  book  of  Joshua  may  stand  either  at  the  beginning  or  end 
of  a  period.  May  bring  the  preceding  period  to  a  close, 
inasmuch  as  it  is  the  complement  and  conclusion  of  all  that 
precedes.  We  have  seen  the  segregation,  preparation  and 
establishment  of  the  people  of  God.  They  are  yet  to  be  fur- 
nished with  a  land.  This  is  provided  in  the  book.  At  the 
same  time  it  may  be  considered  as  the  opening  of  a  new  period. 
Its  theme  is  God's  gift  of  Canaan  to  Israel. 

Book  may  be  divided  into  four  parts :  I.  Preliminaries  of 
the  conquest,  chaps.  1-5.  II.  Actual  conquest,  chaps.  6-12, 
III.  Division  of  the  land,  chaps.  13-22.  IV.  Two  final 
addresses  of  Joshua,  reminding  the  people  of  all  that  God  had 
done  for  them ;  that  He  had  fulfilled  all  His  promises  to  them, 
and  urging  them  to  new  obedience. 

Some  critics  allege  that  Joshua  is  part  of  the  Pentateuch. 
JRefly  :  1.  It  has  never  been  so  regarded,  even  from  the  earliest 
times.  2.  Moreover,  it  is  rendered  impossible  by  the  statement 
near  the  close  of  Deuteronomy,  that  Moses  wrote  the  Penta- 
teuch, (Deut.  31 :  9  and  24).  3.  Peculiarities  of  language  in 
Joshua  distinguish  it  from  the  Pentateuch,  e.  g.,  the  personal 
pronoun  of  the  third  person  is  written  "  hu  "  in  the  Pentateuch, 
never  so  in  Joshua.  "J'reho,"  (Jericho),  in  Pentateuch,  is 
written  "  J'riho  "  in  Joshua.  The  expressions,  "  Lord  of  the 
whole  earth,"  and  "  the  Treasury  of  the  House  of  the  Lord," 
are  found  in  Joshua  and  not  in  Pentateuch. 

A.     DATE. 

Opinion  is  divided  as  to  why  the  book  is  called  Joshua.  Some 
say  because  Joshua  wrote  it ;  others,  because  he  is  the  principal 

10 


74  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

theme.  The  book  is  obnoxious  to  a  certain  class  of  critics  : 
I.  Because  of  the  supernatural  in  it.  II.  Because  it  renders  so 
much  testimony  to  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch. 
They  desire  to  overturn  its  date,  put  it  at  a  much  later  date 
than  that  of  the  events  recorded,  and  so  destroy  its  credibility. 
Make  it  legendary.  It  has  been  placed  by  different  critics,  at 
the  time  of  the  Babylonish  exile,  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  in  that 
of  Jeroboam,  in  that  of  David,  &c.  Some  apply  the  devisive 
hypotheses  which  have  been  brought  against  the  Pentateuch, 
to  Joshua  also.  One  acute  critic  says  it  is  made  up  of  two  parts : 
1.  Part  written  by  an  Elohist  before  the  time  of  Samuel.  Wrote 
the  geopraphical  part  of  the  book,  giving  the  boundaries  of  dif- 
ferent tribes.  2.  The  book  was  then  completed  in  the  time  of 
Samuel. 

J5^ee^  supposes  three  different  writers  :  1.  An  Elohist;  2.  A 
Jehovist ;  3.  A  writer  in  time  of  king  Manasseh,  who  also 
wrote  Deuteronomv. 

Another  says  there  were  five  writers;  1.  An  Elohist;  2. 
Book  of  Jasher,  existing  in  two  successive  forms,  the  first  in 
time  of  Solomon,  then  rewritten ;  3.  Books  of  wars,  still  later ; 
4,  A  Jehovist;  5.  A  writer  in  the  time  of  Manasseh.  The  last 
writer  brought  the  book  to  its  present  form,  and  also  wrote 
Deuteronomy. 

In  order  to  come  to  any  conclusion  as  to  the  date,  we  must 
examine  the  data  given  in  the  book  itself. 

1.  Josh.  16 :  10.  When  Joshua  was  written,  the  Canaanites 
were  still  dwelling  in  Gezer.  But  we  are  told  (1  Kings  9  :  16), 
that  they  were  destroyed  by  the  king  of  Egypt,  and  Gezer  was 
given  to  Solomon's  wife.  So  Joshua  must  have  been  written 
before  this. 

2.  15 :  63,  at  the  date  of  this  book  the  Jebusites  were  still 
dwelling  at  Jerusalem.  The  book  must  have  been  written 
before  David  captured  the  stronghold  of  Zion.  (2  Sam.  24 : 
5-8),  Jebusites  could  not  be  driven  out  at  first ;  but  this  could 
not  be  said  after  the  capture  by  David,  though  a  Jebusite  king 
is  mentioned  as  dwelling  there. 

3.  Zidonians  were  to  be  driven  out,  had  not  been  yet,  13 :  6. 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  75 

But  in  David's  time  they  were  not  to  be  driven  out.  He  bad 
an  alliance  with  them.  Again,  in  11  :  8;  19  :  28,  the  adjective 
"  great "  is  connected  with  Zidon,  which  was  no  longer  the  case 
in  the  time  of  David,  since  Tyre  had  so  far  outstripped  Zidon 
that  the  epithet  was  dropped,  (2  Sam.  5  :  11 ;  1  Kings  5:1). 

4.  A  place  hrt,d  not  yet  been  chosen  for  permanent  sanctuary. 
"  Should  choose,"  (9  :  27).  But  in  Ps.  78 :  68,  and  1  Chron. 
21  :  18,  a  place  is  designated  as  already  chosen.  The  same  pas- 
sage (9 :  27),  declares  that  the  Gibeonites  were  still  "  hewers  of 
wood  and  drawers  of  water."  This  must  have  been  prior  to 
Saul,  as  they  ceased  to  be  so  then. 

5.  Rahab  was  still  living  in  Israel,  (6 :  25),  Caleb  also,  who 
was  eighty  years  old  when  they  came  into  Canaan,  was  living, 
(14 :  14),  which  would  bring  the  date  of  the  book  still  higher 
up.     ("  Caleb,"  however,  in  this  verse  may  mean  a  family). 

6.  The  writer,  using  "  we  "  and  "  us,"  (5  :  1,  6),  distinctly 
includes  himself  among  those  who  came  into  Canaan. 

7.  Some  forms  of  expression  occur  which  aflford  incidental 
corroboration.  "  Eber  ha-yarden  "  denotes  the  country  east  of 
the  Jordan.  But  in  the  days  of  Moses  it  meant  the  west.  In 
Joshua  it  is  used  ambiguously ;  may  mean  beyond  from  the 
wilderness,  or  from  the  land  itself.  It  was  in  the  period  of 
transition.  The  east  had  not  yet  obtained  priority,  (Josh.  5:1; 
12:  1 ;  13  :  8).  Same  ambiguity  occurs  in  1  Chron.  — :  — . 
Accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  the  people  had  just  returned 
from  exile.  Again,  in  Judges  20 :  1,  and  from  that  on  (2  Sam. 
24 :  2),  the  utmost  limits  of  the  land  were  designated  by  the 
phrase  "  from  Dan  to  Beer-sheba."  But  in  Joshua  by  the  ex- 
pression, Mt.  Halak  to  Baal-gad,"  (11:  17  and  12:  7).  The 
other  expression  had  not  yet  come  into  use. 

8.  Joshua  gives  minute  details  with  greatest  precision,  with 
reference  not  only  to  the  boundaries  of  each  tribe,  but  also  to 
changes  made.  The  territory,  e.  g.,  first  assigned  to  Judah 
(15  chap.)  being  too  large,  was  never  taken  up,  but  afterward 
given  to  another  tribe,  (19 :  1).  The  record  of  such  changes 
indicates  that  the  writer  was  contemporary  with  the  events,  as 
they  would  be  unimportant  to  a  writer  coming  at  a  later  date. 


76  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

Also,  a  number  of  old  Canaanitish  names  are  retained  which 
were  afterward  supplanted  by  Israelitish  names.  Joshua  gives 
both.  Shows  him  to  be  contemporary,  (14 :  15;  15;  18:  13, 
14,  16,  28).  Same  thing  may  be  argued  from  the  exactness 
with  which  numbers  are  given,  (4:13;  7  :  4,  5 ;  8 :  25). 

9.  Represents  state  of  things  different  from  that  of  subse- 
quent period ;  e.  g.,  enumeration  of  Levitical  cities  (Joshua  21 
and  1  Ohron.  6),  and  cities  of  Simeon,  (Joshua  19 :  1-9,  and  1 
Chron.  4 :  28).  In  1  Sam.  22  :  19,  Nob  is  spoken  of  as  a  city 
of  priests.  Not  so  in  Joshua  ;  Ziklag,  in  Joshua,  belongs  to 
Simeon,  but  in  time  of  David,  to  the  king  of  Gath.  These  are 
not  discrepancies,  but  changes  which  took  place  in  course  of 
time.  So  the  city  of  Ai  had  been  destroyed  (Joshua  8  ;  28)  but 
had  been  rebuilt  before  Isaiah,  (Isaiah  10 :  28). 

These  positive  arguments  derived  from  the  book  itself,  show 
its  great  antiquity.  There  are  two  classes  of  objections  urged 
against  this  conclusion,  one  direct,  the  other  indirect;  one 
affecting  the  matter,  the  other  the  form. 

I.  As  to  the  first,  it  is  alleged  that  a  number  of  passages  rebut 
this  evidence,  and  prove  later  date. 

1.  Joshua  cursed  any  one  who  should  rebuild  Jericho,  (6  :  26). 
This  curse  was  fulfilled  in  1  Kings,  16  :  34.  It  is  said  so  clear 
and  exact  a  prediction  could  not  have  been  written  before  the 
event.  Joshua  must  then  be  as  late  as  Ahab.  But  (1)  this 
rests  on  the  assumption  that  prophecy  was  impossible.  (2)  1 
Kings,  16 :  34,  declares  it  a  fulfillment  of  the  word  of  Joshua. 
(3)  While  Joshua  mentions  curse,  he  mentions  no  fulfillment. 
Would  if  it  had  occurred.  Joshua,  18  :  21  ;  2  Samuel,  10  :  5  ; 
Judges,  1 :  16  and  3  :  13,  are  not  inconsistent  with  Joshua 
6 :  26.     Jericho  existed  only  as  an  unwalled  village. 

2.  A  distinction  is  made  between  the  mountains  of  Judah  and 
those  of  Israel,  which  implies  the  existence^of  the  two  king- 
doms, (11 :  16-21).  Book  must  have  been  written  after  the 
schism.  Ans.  (1)  The  schism  had  been  long  in  preparation. 
Germ  as  far  back  as  the  blessing  of  Jacob,  and  promise  of  pre- 
eminence to  Judah.  Three  times  was  the  kingdom  rent,  under 
David.  Judah  remained  faithful.  (2)  These  names  are  explained 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  77 

ia  the  book  of  Joshua  itself.  Judah  first  received  his  inherit- 
ance in  Canaan.  It  would  be  natural  to  call  the  mountains  in 
the  region  of  Judah,  "  Mountains  of  Judah,"  and  those  where 
the  camp  of  Israel  was  located,  "  Mountains  of  Israel." 

3.  In  Joshua  10  :  1 ;  12  :  10  and  15  :  63,  the  name  Jerusalem 
occurs.  But,  it  is  said,  this  name  was  not  given  before  its  capture 
by  David.  It  was  previously  called  Jebus,  from  the  Jebusites, 
(Judges,  19  :  10).  Therefore  the  book  was  not  wriiten  before 
time  of  David.  Ans.  (1)  There  is  no  proof  for  the  assumption 
that  the  name  originated  in  time  of  David.  No  such  intima- 
tion in  history.  It  was  called  Jerusalem  in  the  days  of  Saul, 
(1  Samuel,  17  :  54).  Based  on  the  name  Salem,  (Genesis, 
14 :  18),  which  the  Israelites  reimposed  and  prolonged  upon 
entering  Canaan.  (2)  The  argument  might  with  better  reason 
be  reversed  ;  and  it  might  be  urged  that  the  use  of  the  name 
"  Jebus  "  in  Joshua  (15  :  8  ;  18  :  16  and  28)  proves  antiquity  of 
the  book,  since  the  name  was  discontinued  by  the  time  of 
David. 

4.  In  Joshua  13  :  30,  mention  is  made  of  the  towns  of  Jair. 
The  number  of  cities  is  given  as  sixty.  But  in  Judges  10 :  34, 
these  cities  are  connected  with  the  name  of  a  judge  (time  of 
Judges)  from  whom  it  is  alleged,  they  received  their  name,  and 
the  number  is  given  as  thirty.  Later,  in  the  time  of  Solomon, 
number  is  given  as  sixty,  (1  Kings  4 :  13).  Hence,  taking  the 
two  things  together,  the  "  Havoth  Jair  "  of  Joshua  is  posterior 
to  Judge  Jair.  The  number  sixty,  of  1  Kings  4  :  13,  implies 
that  the  cities  had  multiplied.  But,  we  reply,  this  is  an  utter 
perversion  of  facts.  (1)  This  name  occurs  in  the  books  of  Moses 
(Num.  32 :  41,  Deut,  3  :  4,  14),  The  latter  passage  expressly 
says  there  were  sixty  cities  called  after  the  name  of  Jair.  (2) 
This  is  confirmed  by  the  genealogy  of  Jair,  (1  Chron.  2:  21). 
He  belonged  to  the  fourth  generation  in  descent  from  Manasseh. 
Zelophehad  belonged  to  the  same  line  and  generation  (Joshua 
17  :  3).  But  he  was  contemporary  with  Moses  and  Eieazer 
(Num.  27  :  2).  So  Jair  must  have  been  also.  (3)  An  inciden- 
tal confirmation  is  found  in  Joshua  19 :  34.  Territory  of 
Naphtali  is  said  to  extend  to  "  Judah  upon  Jordan  toward  the 


78  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

sun  rising."  But  Judah  had  no  territory  east  of  Jordan,  Jair 
•however,  was  a  descendant  of  Judah,  and  had  these  cities, 
which  he  had  conquered,  opposite  the  border  of  Naphtali,  and 
in  the  border  of  Judah.  A  reference  to  Jair  is  the  only  plausible 
explanation  of  this  obscure  passage.  (4)  The  word  "  Havoth," 
from  root,  meaning  to  live,  signifies  dwellings,  denotes  high 
antiquity.  The  alleged  contrariety  to  Judges  10:  34,  is  only 
apparent.  In  the  days  of  Moses  there  was  a  Jair  who  con- 
quered and  gave  names  to  sixty  cities.  In  time  of  the  Judges 
there  was  also  a  Jair  who  renewed  these  names.  Analogous 
cases,  Beer-sheba  was  twice  named,  (Gen.  21  :  31  and  26 :  33). 
Also,  Bethel,  more  than  once,  (Gen.  28 :  19,  and  35  :  7,  15). 

5.  A  fifth  argument  is  based  upon  Joshua  10 :  13,  where  the 
book  of  Jasher  is  quoted.  This  book,  say  objectors,  was  not 
written  before  the  time  of  David,  because  it  contains  David's 
lament  for  Saul  and  Jonathan,  (2  Sam.  1 :  17,  18,  &c).  Ans. 
The  book  of  Jasher  did  not  take  its  name  from  an  individual. 
"  Jasher  "  means  upright,  and  the  "  book  of  Jasher  "  is  the  "  book 
of  the  upright."  It  appears  to  have  been  a  collection  of  poems 
celebrating  the  names  and  deeds  of  upright  men.  Additions 
were  made  to  it  from  time  to  time,  and  in  course  of  time 
David's  lament  was  incorporated  in  it. 

6.  It  is  said  that  the  repeated  occurrence  of  the  phrase  "  unto 
this  day "  shows  later  origin  of  Joshua.  Considerable  time 
must  have  elapsed  in  order  to  allow  the  expression.  It  occurs 
seventeen  times.  Ans.  Several  of  these  are  incorporated  in 
speeches  made  by  Joshua  himself,  and  others  of  his  time,  (22 : 
3  and  17  ;  23  :  8  and  9).  Twice  it  is  used  in  connection  with  the 
lives  of  persons  in  Joshua's  time,  (6  :  25 ;  14  :  14).  Twice  it  is 
used  with  names  of  places,  (5  :  9  ;  7  :  26),  and  several  times  with 
heaps  of  stones,  (7  :  26  ;  4  :  9,  &c.),  for  which  use  the  lapse  of  a 
few  years  would  be  sufficient  to  account.  The  same  is  true  of 
other  passages,  (15  :  63  ;  16  :  10 ;  9  :  27 ;  8  :  28,  &c).  All  may 
be  accounted  for  by  the  lapse  of  only  a  few  years. 

II.  The  second  mode  of  invalidating  the  testimony  of  Joshua, 
is  to  deny  its  unity.  It  is  asserted  that  certain  parts  of  it  were 
written  by  eye  witnesses,  while  others  were  added  by  later 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  79 

writers.  But  if  the  book  is  composed  of  different  sections, 
written  by  different  persons  and  at  different  times,  proofs  only 
establish  the  date  of  particular  sections,  not  of  the  entire  book. 
It  is  argued  : 

1.  That  the  book  is  a  continuation  of  the  Pentateuch ;  that 
it  contains  parallel  narratives  of  the  same  events,  by  different 
authors.  The  account  of  the  choosing  twelve  men  from  the 
tribes,  (3  :  12  and  4 :  2),  and  of  the  passing  over  Jordan,  (3  :  6 
and  3  :  17),  are  given  as  examples.  But,  we  reply,  these  repe- 
titions grow  out  of  the  simple  style  of  Hebrew  narrative.  In 
the  preparation  for  crossing,  the  writer  gives  Joshua's  order. 
Afterward,  when  they  came  to  cross,  he  gives  the  account 
in  more  detail.  Also,  in  regard  to  the  selection  of  the  stones, 
when  he  describes  their  setting  up,  he  goes  back  again  to  the 
selection  of  the  men  to  carry  them.  Again,  the  two  addresses 
of  Joshua  in  23d  and  24th  chapters,  are  said  to  be  the  same. 
The  assertion  is  unfounded,  supported  by  no  evidence. 

2.  There  are  contradictions  in  the  book.  (1)  In  11 :  15-23, 
it  is  said  the  whole  land  was  taken.  But,  later,  in  13  :  1,  a 
portion  of  the  land  still  remains  to  be  possessed.  Reply  :  There 
is  no  inconsistency  here.  The  land  had  been  overrun  and 
imperfectly  conquered.  Much  remained  to  be  done  in  detail. 
Canaanites  were  to  be  expelled,  but  gradually,  in  accordance 
with  the  promise  in  Ex.  23  :  28-29.  (2)  In  10 :  36-39,  Joshua 
is  said  to  have  destroyed  Hebron  and  Debir ;  but  15  :  14-17, 
ascribes  this  to  Caleb.  Reply :  The  accounts  are  not  contra- 
dictory, but  supplementary.  The  cities  were  conquered  more 
than  once.  (3)  The  assignment  of  Ekron,  Ashdod  and  Gaza  to 
Judah,  (15 :  45-47),  is  said  to  conflict  with  13 :  3,  which  says 
they  remain  to  be  conquered.  Reply:  No  inconsistency.  Only 
shows  that  the  territory  of  each  tribe  was  assigned  before  it 
was  conquered.  The  several  tribes  were  then  to  conquer  their 
portion.  (4)  The  lists  of  cities  given  in  15:  21-32,  33-36; 
19 :  35-38,  do  not  correspond  with  the  sums  given  at  close  of 
each.  This  is  not  accidental,  as  it  occurs  four  times.  Reply  : 
The  most  that  could  be  proved  would  be  that  the  men  did  not 
know  how  to  count.     Absurd;  the  differences  may  be  accounted 


80  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

for.  Some  places  may  have  more  than  one  name ;  or  some  may 
have  been  small  villages,  and  not  counted  in  summing  up ;  or 
some  may  have  sprang  up  afterwards. 

3.  It  is  alleged  that  there  are  such  differences  of  language, 
style  and  mode  of  treatment  between  the  geographical  and 
historical  parts,  that  they  could  not  have  come  from  the  same 
hand.  Reply.  These  differences  grow  out  of  the  difference  of 
subjects.  The  geographical  part  is  divided  into  distinct  sec- 
tions, the  historical  is  not.  The  reason  is,  that  the  boundaries 
of  the  twelve  tribes  were  to  be  described  in  the  former.  Again, 
great  prominence  is  given  in  geographical  parts  to  Eleazer  the 
high  priest,  (14  :  1 ;  19  :  51 ;  21 :  1),  while  he  is  not  mentioned 
in  historical  part.  Accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  the  high 
priest  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  conquest  under  Joshua,  but 
was  to  take  part  in  the  distribution  of  the  land,  (Numbers 
34 :  17-18).  Slight  verbal  differences  also  occur  in  different 
sections.  They  are  trivial,  e.  g.,  the  different  words  used  for 
"tribe."  In  one  section  is  "  Matteh,"  in  another  "  Shebet." 
The  first  means  a  stick  or  rod,  hence  a  sprout,  and  then  branches 
as  springing  from  a  root.  The  second  is  scepter,  tribe  as  a 
sovereignty.  There  is  no  evidence  for  a  later  date  and  we 
conclude  that  the  book  was  written  by  a  person  contemporary 
with  the  events  recorded,  and  by  the  one  who  claims  to  be  its 
author. 

B.     AUTHORSHIP. 

I.  In  favor  of  Joshua  as  author. 

1.  Near  the  close  of  the  book  (24:  26)  occurs  the  sentence: 
"  Joshua  wrote  these  words  in  the  book  of  the  law."  The 
"  book  of  the  law  "  is  the  same  that  was  committed  to  the  care 
of  the  Levites  in  Deut.  31 :  24.  To  what  does  "  these  words  " 
refer  ?  If  to  the  previous  part  of  the  book,  then  Joshua  wrote 
it ;  but  if  only  to  the  last  two  chapters,  he  wrote  them.  The 
probability  is  that  the  whole  book  is  meant. 

2.  In  24 :  29,  an  honorary  epithet  is  added  to  his  name, 
"  servant  of  the  Lord."     This  expression  is  not  used  previously 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  81 

in  regard  to  him,  and  is  naturally  explained  here  by  the  sup- 
position that  Joshua  wrote  the  book,  and  some  writer  after  him 
appended  this  title  at  its  close.  The  same  thing  occurs  with 
regard  to  Moses  near  the  close  of  Deut.  (34  :  5). 

3.  There  is  an  antecedent  presumption  that  Joshua  would 
record  the  events  of  interest  transpiring  in  his  own  life,  as 
Moses  did  of  himself. 

4.  The  traditions  of  the  Rabbins  and  Talmud  favor  the 
authorship  of  Joshua ;  but  the  argument  is  not  of  much  weight. 

II.  Against  Joshua.  The  principal  difficulty  in  the  way  of 
the  conclusion  that  Joshua  is  the  author,  arises  from  the  fact 
that  events  are  recorded  which  seem  to  have  occurred  after  his 
death.  The  book  of  Judges,  e.  g.,  opens  with  the  death  of 
Joshua,  and  then  proceeds  to  relate  what  occurred  after  his 
death.  But  the  facts  narrated  in  this  passage  (1 :  1-15),  are 
the  same  as  those  recorded  in  Joshua  15 :  13-19.  Again,  in 
the  18th  chap,  of  Judges,  the  same  thing  is  recorded  as  in 
Joshua  19 :  47.  Some  critics  on  this  account  have  assumed 
that  the  book  could  not  have  been  written  by  Joshua.  He  was 
only  a  participant.  Keil  says  it  was  written  by  a  contemporary 
and  elder,  who  outlived  Joshua.  Another  critic  says  Joshua 
wrote  the  historical  part,  (first  twelve  chapters  with  last  two), 
while  the  intervening  chapters  (geographical  part)  were  inserted 
subsequently  by  a  person  authorized  to  do  so ;  probably  com- 
piled from  papers  prepared  as  a  basis  (18 :  6-9).  The  things 
mentioned  in  Judges  must  have  occured  before  Joshua's  death. 
A  few  fiicts  besides  the  notice  of  his  death  may  have  been  added 
by  some  one  afterward. 


C.  RELATION  OF  JOSHUA  TO  THE 
PENTATEUCH. 

Joshua  bears  frequent  testimony  to  the  Mosaic  authorship  of 
the  Pentateuch.  But  this  is  said  to  be  discredited  by  three 
passages : 

I.  The  first  has  reference  to  the  law  of  circumcision.     In  5  : 

11 


82  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

2-7,  Joshua  is  commanded  to  circumcise  all  the  Israelites, 
because  those  that  had  left  Egypt  had  died.  It  is  said  if  the 
law  in  Gen.  17 :  12-14  and  Lev.  12 :  3,  had  been  enforced  from 
the  days  of  Abraham,  such  a  total  neglect  of  circumcision  could 
not  have  occurred.  But,  we  reply,  1.  That  circumcision  was 
not  a  novel  rite,  in  the  opinion  of  the  writer,  appears  from  5  :  2 
and  5.  He  says  "  again  "  and  "  all  the  people  that  came  out 
were  circumcised."  2.  The  high  antiquity  of  the  rite  is  shown 
by  the  fact  that  stone  knives  were  used  (5 :  2).  See  also,  Ex. 
4 :  25.  3.  The  circumstances  under  which  the  rite  was  per- 
formed show  its  importance.  Disabled  and  imperiled  the  whole 
army,  (5 :  8).  Parallel  case  in  Gen.  34 :  25.  Why  was  the 
rite  neglected  in  the  wilderness  ?  Some  say  on  account  of  the 
peril  and  inconvenience  to  which  they  would  be  exposed  in 
their  wanderings.  But  sometimes  the  camp  remained  in  one 
place  for  months,  (Num.  9  :  22).  The  true  reason  seems  to  be 
found  in  5 :  6-7.  They  had  forfeited  their  rights  and  been 
condemned  and  rejected.  Had  forfeited  their  rights  to  this 
seal,  also  to  Passover.  There  is  no  mention  of  it  after  the 
second  year  from  Egypt,  (Num.  9 :  1-2),  until  renewed  by 
Joshua  in  5  :  10.  So  there  is  no  mention  of  circumcision  until 
they  are  about  to  enter  Canaan.  Moses  pleads  the  reproach  of 
Egypt  when  God  is  about  to  destroy,  (Ex.  32  :  12 ;  Num.  14  : 
13).  In  5  :  9,  this  "  reproach  of  Egypt  "  is  rolled  away.  God's 
covenant  is  renewed,  and  circumcision  is  restored. 

11.  In  Josh.  24  :  1,  all  the  people  are  summoned  to  Shechem, 
and  they  present  themselves  "  before  the  Lord.  Also,  in  24  :  26, 
Joshua  set  up  a  stone  "  under  an  oak  that  was  by  the  Sanctuary 
of  the  Lord."  It  is  argued  from  these  two  verses  that  there 
was  a  tabernacle  at  Shechem,  while  Josh.  18 :  1,  places  it  at 
Shiloh.  There  would  then  be  two  places  of  worship  contrary 
to  Deut.  12  :  5-14.  Early  Greek  translators  recognized  this 
difficulty,  and  translated  "Shiloh"  instead  of  "Shechem,"  in  the 
first  verse.  But  the  difficulty  is  only  apparent.  The  expres- 
sion, "before  the  Lord,"  does  not  necessarily  imply  a  tabernacle. 
It  was  used  in  reference  to  the  sanctuary,  but  also  in  other  con- 
nections, (Gen.  10  :  9 ;   Ex.  20 :  3  ;  Dan.  6  :  10 ;  Ps.  56  :  13). 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  83 

When,  in  the  26th  verse,  sanctuary  is  mentioned,  it  need  not 
imply  that  there  was  there  a  tabernacle  or  altar.  "T/ie  oak  in 
the  sanctuary,"  (literal  translation),  shows  that  it  was  only 
sacred  ground.  That  oak  was  sacred.  Here  Abraham  built 
his  first  altar,  (Gen.  35  :  2^;  Gen.  12:  6-7).  "Plain"  is  here 
to  be  translated  oak.  Called  sanctuary  because  it  was  sacred 
ground.  In  memory  of  this,  on  account  of  previous  solemnities 
here,  Joshua  commands  the  people  at  Shechem  to  put  away 
strange  Gods.  See  mention  of  the  oak  (plain)  again  in  Judg. 
9:6. 

III.  Josh.  7  :  24-26,  Achan's  whole  family  is  put  to  death 
for  his  sin.  This  is  said  to  be  inconsistent  with  the  law  in 
Deut.  24  :  16.  But  the  latter  was  a  rule  for  human  judgment. 
Not  to  be  confounded  with  God's  dealings.  He  expressly  says 
He  visits  the  iniquity  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children  to  the 
third  and  fourth  generation,  (Ex.  20 :  5).  Constantly  acts  on 
this  principle.  This  was  not  a  human  judgment,  but  God's 
command,  (7  :  15).     If  we  question  it,  we  must  question  God. 

Vouchers  for  the  credibility  of  the  book  :  1.  It  was  written 
by  a  contemporary  and  eye  witness.  2.  Memoranda  (18  :  8,  9). 
3,  Appeals  to  extant  monuments  (4:9;  7  :  26).  4.  It  appeals 
to  contemporary  names  of  places,  Gilgal  (5:9);  Achor  (7  :  26). 
5.  To  existing  institutions  (9 :  27).  6.  Confirmation  from 
other  books  of  Scripture.  7.  Accuracy  of  its  geographical 
details  is  verified  by  the  researches  of  modern  travelers. 

D.     MORALITY. 

A  standing  objection  is  made  to  book  of  Joshua  as  to  its 
morality.  It  is  urged  that  it  not  only  justifies  a  bloody  and 
cruel  war,  but  also  attributes  it  directly  to  God.  This  is  not 
to  be  accounted  for  :  1.  By  the  fact  that  ancient  wars  were 
more  cruel  than  modern.  2.  Nor  by  the  fact  that  Israel  had 
no  land  and  had  a  right  to  seize  one  if  possible.     But, 

1.  God  as  sovereign  had  the  right  to  reclaim  the  land  from 
the  idolatrous  Canaanites  and  give  it  to  whom  He  pleased,  to 
Israel  who  had  once  forfeited  it. 


84  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

2.  The  Canaanites,  from  the  testimony  of  Scripture,  were 
among  the  most  wicked  and  godless  of  heathen  nations,  (Gen. 
15  :  16,  &c.)  God  had  a  right  to  punish  them  as  He  did  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah.  Had  he  destroyed  them  in  the  same  manner, 
no  complaint  would  be  made.  But  He  chose  to  make  Israel 
the  executioner  of  his  judgment  against  them.  It  was  not  a 
fanatical  crusade,  but  a  holy  war.  The  miracles  attending  it 
show  that  Israel  was  under  immediate  divine  guidance,  e.  g., 
the  crossing  of  Jordan,  falling  of  the  walls  of  Jericho,  &c.  The 
Canaanites  were  devoted  to  destruction  by  divine  command, 
and  the  war  was  not  carried  on  in  a  vindictive  or  selfish  spirit, 
but  in  obedience  to  that  command.  All  that  was  seized  was 
seized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.  God  constantly  makes  one 
nation  the  executor  of  his  will  upon  another,  as  Persia  upon 
Babylon,  Greece  upon  Persia,  &c.  Wicked  nations  are  often 
his  unconscious  agents ;  here  a  holy  nation  was  his  conscious 
agent.  Israel  comprised  all  the  holiness  that  existed  in  the 
earth.  Served  the  Lord  all  the  days  of  Joshua,  (24 :  31). 
Shown  also  by  the  rarity  of  such  cases  as  that  of  Achan's  and 
its  punishment.  The  old  idolatrous  generation  had  died  in  the 
wilderness,  and  a  new  and  pious  generation  had  been  trained 
up  by  Moses.  The  charge  against  Israel  cannot  be  a  charge 
against  a  people  as  guilty  as  the  Canaanites.  Their  action 
(Israel)  was  a  confession  of  like  desert  of  punishment  if  they 
forsook  God. 

3.  It  is  said  that  such  indiscriminate  slaughter  of  men, 
women  and  children  is  inconsistent  with  the  character  of  God. 
But  it  is  a  fact  of  every  day's  providence.  In  earthquakes, 
wars,  pestilence,  none  are  spared.  Moreover,  a  partial  exter- 
mination would  not  have  secured  the  safety  and  purity  of 
Israel. 


Book  of  Judges. 


The  book  of  Judges  contains  the  history  of  the  Children  of 
Israel  from  the  death  of  Joshua  to  the  death  of  Samson.  The 
people  had  now  been  segregated  and  organized  under  a  divine 
constitution.  From  the  death  of  Joshua  they  had  no  visible 
acknowledged  head.  He  had  been  their  head.  He  had  now  no 
successor.  There  was  no  central  government.  God  was  their 
only  king.  The  sanctuary  was  His  place  of  meeting  with  His 
people.  His  law  was  their  only  bond  of  union.  The  question 
that  now  arises  is,  could  the  theocracy  be  maintained  ?  This 
depended  entirely  upon  their  piety  and  conduct.  If  faithful, 
they  would  be  the  happiest  of  people.  If  unfaithful,  they 
would  fall  asunder  and  be  delivered  over  to  their  enemies  and 
punishment.  The  Lord  would  avenge  His  neglected  service. 
The  experiment  proved  that  they  were  not  fit  for  such  a  govern- 
ment. They  would  not  govern  themselves  nor  conquer  their 
enemies.  Crimes  could  not  be  suppressed  nor  invasions  warded 
off.  Downward  tendencies  were  checked  by  the  Judges  for  a 
time.  But  decline  still  progresses  until  the  time  of  Jeptha  and 
Samson,  when  it  reached  its  lowest  point.  The  providential 
design  in  all  this  was  to  show  the  necessity  of  a  kingdom.  A 
type  of  Christ's  kingdom.  To  develope  a  longing  for  a  Ee- 
deemer.  A  fullness  of  narrative  not  necessary,  therefore  this 
book  does  not  present  a  continuous  narrative,  but  a  series  of 
selected  facts,  specially  adapted  to  enforce  the  great  lesson 
conveyed. 

PROOF. 

1.  From  plan  of  writer,  (2  :  11-19).  He  proposes  to  narrate 
a  series  of  relapses,  punished  by  conquest,  and  restoration  again 


86  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

succeeding.  He  steadily  adheres  to  this  plan.  Intervals  of 
rest,  (3  :  11,  forty  years  ;  3  :  30,  eighty  years),  are  passed  over 
in  silence.  Of  three  judges,  the  names  are  merely  mentioned: 
Ibzan,  Elon  and  Abdon,  (12  :  8-15).  In  regard  to  some,  there 
is  more  detail,  e.  g.,  Abimelech  9 ;  Samson  14.  The  same  law 
of  retribution  held  for  all,  and  applied  to  individuals  as  well  as 
to  the  nation. 

2.  Brevity  of  the  book.  It  covers  more  than  300  years, 
which  shows  that  no  detailed  history  could  have  been  entered 
into. 

3.  Arrangement.  The  last  five  chapters  belong  to  an  earlier 
period  of  the  Judges,  but  were  passed  over  in  their  proper  place, 
because  not  appropriate,  and  put  in  their  present  position. 
They  were  too  important  to  be  entirely  omitted.  If  omitted  in 
their  proper  place,  we  may  infer  that  others  were  omitted 
entirely. 

4.  Facts  which  belong  to  this  period  are  mentioned  in  other 
books  and  never  referred  to  in  this,  (1  Sam.  12 :  11).  Bedan 
mentioned  as  a  judge.  The  entire  narrative  of  the  Book  of 
Ruth  belongs  to  this  period.  There  is  also  uo  mention  of  Eli 
and  Samuel,  while  the  former  was  very  probably  contemporary 
with  Samson.  A  knowledge  of  the  design  is  important  to  a 
correct  apprehension  of  the  period  covered  by  the  book.  It  was, 
upon  the  whole,  one  of  decline,  yet  not  proper  to  conclude  that 
it  was  one  of  unrestrained  license.  For  (1)  long  intervals,  con- 
stituting greater  and  best  part  of  the  period,  are  passed  over  in 
silence,  in  which  the  land  had  rest  from  war  and  contest.  (2) 
The  design  of  writer  led  him  to  single  out  worst  features  of  the 
period.  (3)  The  book  was  written  from  a  point  of  view  of 
strictly  legal  requirement.  It  does  not  form  ground  of  com- 
parison with  other  periods.  (4)  Stands  in  tacit  contrast  with 
the  piety  prevailing  under  Joshua,  and  the  reformation  wrought 
by  Samuel  and  David.  So  Luther's  reformation  shines  forth 
all  the  brighter  from  contrast  with  the  surrounding  darkness. 
(5)  The  picture  of  lovely  piety  in  Ruth  shows  what  scenes 
might  have  been  depicted. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  87 

Book  is  divided  into  three  parts  : 

1.  Duplicate  introduction,  (1-3  :  6). 

2.  History  of  the  twelve  judges,  (3  :  7-16  :  31). 

3.  Duplicate  appendix,  (17-21). 

A  question  comes  up  here  in  regard  to  unity  of  the  book. 
Do  all  parts  form  one  whole,  or  are  they  parts  of  separate 
works  ? 

The  first  objection  is  drawn  from  nature  of  introduction. 
Consists  of  two  parts  different  in  style  and  each  apparently 
complete  in  itself.  It  is  said  one  of  these  must  be  superfluous. 
But  both  are  needed  to  set  forth  the  history  in  its  true  light. 
There  are  two  great  sources  of  evil  here  exhibited.  1.  Neglect 
to  exterminate  Canaanites,  (1-2 :  5),  shows  what  each  tribe  had 
done  in  the  way  of  exterminating  its  enemies.  These  chapters 
show  weakness  of  tribes  and  the  want  of  concert  of  action, 
hence  Canaanites  were  permitted  to  remain  in  the  land.  This 
division  among  themselves  made  them  weaker  and  a  prey  to 
their  enemies.  It  also  increased  the  sense  of  the  need  of  con- 
solidation. 2.  2 :  6-3  :  6  is  occupied  with  second  great  evil, 
viz. :  Idolatry.  Hengstenberg  says,  first  chapter  details  what 
tribes  had  done  before  the  death  of  Joshua.  2-3  :  6  is  a  general 
survey  of  what  took  place  after  his  death.  Opening  words 
refer  to  contents  of  book  in  general.  Alleged  contradictions 
in  the  introduction  are  only  apparent.  Capture  of  Jerusalem 
by  Judah  in  1 :  8  not  inconsistent  with  1 :  21.  Nor  is  1 :  18  in 
conflict  with  3:3. 

A  second  objection  bears  upon  the  main  body  of  the  book. 
Maintained  that  distinct  sections  of  book  corresponding  to  the 
Judges  mentioned  are  of  diverse  origin.  Argued  from  the 
formal  headings — conclusions — style.  But  the  unity  of  the 
book  is  evinced,  (1)  By  strict  adherence  to  announced  plan, 
(ch.  2).  (2)  By  recurrence  of  phrases  such  as  "  the  Children 
of  Israel  did  evil;"  "the  Lord  delivered  them;"  "the  land 
had  rest;"  &c.,  &c.  Variety  of  expression  is  easily  accounted 
for  from  the  fact  that  the  writer  was  free  to  use  what  expressions 
he  desired,  and  had  free  choice  of  language  :  or  he  may  have 
drawn  his  material  from  preexisting  written  documents,  and  so 
may  have  been  influenced  by  their  phrases. 


88  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

A  third  objection  has  reference  to  the  appendix.  Did  the 
last  five  chapters  proceed  from  the  same  writer  as  the  first  ? 
They  contain  a  narrative  of  two  events  :  1.  Idolatry  of  Micah, 
(17  and  18).  2.  The  vile  affair  of  Gibeah  and  its  consequences. 
That  these  form  an  appendix  appears  from  the  fact  that  events 
recorded  belong  to  an  earlier  period.  (1)  18  :  1  and  2  referred 
to  in  Josh.  19  :  47.  Event  must  have  occurred  before  Book  of 
Joshua  was  written.  (2)  The  second  event  occurred  during 
high  priesthood  of  Phineas,  son  of  Eleazer,  (20 :  28).  Eleazer 
was  contemporary  with  Joshua,  (Josh.  24 :  33).  So  this  must 
have  been  in  next  generation.  That  both  parts  were  written 
by  same  person  appears  from  the  following  reference  :  17  :  6  ; 
18  :  1 ;  19  :  1 ;  21 :  25,  where  same  expression  is  used.  That 
the  writer  was  the  same  with  the  author  of  other  parts,  is 
shown  by  coincidences  of  expression  and  by  fact  that  from  the 
earliest  times,  it  has  formed  part  of  Judges. 

DATE. 

Approximately  determined  from  a  number  of  statements. 

EARLIEST   LIMIT. 

1.  Chap.  18 :  30.  Idolatry  established  by  Danites  and  con- 
tinued "  until  the  day  of  the  capivity  of  the  land."  Book 
written  after  that  captivity.  What  captivity  ?  Some  have  in- 
ferred that  it  was  the  Assyrian  ;  or  even  Babylonish  captivity 
is  referred  to.  But  apart  from  the  fact  that  the  idolatry  could 
not  have  existed  after  Jeroboam  set  up  the  golden  calf  at  Dan, 
such  an  interpretation  would  bring  this  verse  into  conflict  with 
31st  V.  Shiloh  was  abandoned  when  the  ark  was  taken  by 
the  Philistines,  (Ps,  78  :  60),  and  not  occupied  again  by  it.  The 
Philistine  captivity  must  be  referred  to.  Book  could  not  have 
been  written  until  after  the  death  of  Eli.  He  died  when  the 
ark  was  taken. 

2.  (13  :  1).  The  Philistine  domination  lasted  until  their 
great  defeat  under  Samuel,  forty  years,  (1  Sam.  7  :  17).  Book 
could  not  have  been  written  until  after  the  captivity  was  over. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  89 

3.  In  17  :  6  ;  18  :  1 ;  19  :  1 ;  20  :  25,  the  writer  declares  that 
there  was  no  king  in  Israel,  in  those  days.  This  suggests  a 
contrast  with  his  own  time,  implying  that  in  his  time  there  was 
a  king.  It  must,  therefore,  have  been  written  at  least  after 
Saul  began  his  reign. 

LATEST    LIMIT. 

1.  It  may  be  inferred  that  it  was  written  prior  to  the  degen- 
eracy of  the  kingdom.  "In  those  days  every  man  did  what 
was  right  in  his  own  eyes,"  implies  a  prosperous  period  in  his 
own  time.  The  language  is  of  one  who  would  commend  the 
kingdom,  and  contrast  it  with  former  period. 

2.  Chap.  1 :  21  and  19  :  11,  the  Jebusites  were  dwelling  with 
Benjamin ;  but  after  this  David  seized  Jebus  and  expelled  the 
Jebusites ;  the  book,  therefore,  must  have  been  written  before 
the  end  of  his  reign. 

3.  Confirmatory.  Several  places  mentioned  in  connection 
with  their  old  Canaanitish  names,  (1 :  10-11 ;  1 :  23 ;  18  :  29). 
This  phenomenon  does  not  appear  in  later  books,  not  even  in 
Samuel.  Delicate  difference  of  expression  between  Joshua  and 
Judges.  Joshua  mentions  old  Canaanitish  names  first  as  more 
familiar  to  the  writer  than  the  new  ones.  Judges  mentions  the 
Israelitish  name  first  as  being  more  familiar  than  the  old,  shows 
the  old  names  were  becoming  obsolete.  Hence  we  conclude 
that  the  book  was  not  written  before  establishment  of  kingdom, 
nor  after  the  time  of  David.  Talmud  says  it  was  written  by 
Prophet  Samuel.  Mere  conjecture.  Can  only  infer  from  posi- 
tion of  book  that  its  author  was  an  inspired  man,  and  an  official 
prophet. 

CHRONOLOGY. 

If  we  sum  up  all  the  judgeships  and  intervals  of  rest,  the 
aggregate  is  410  years ;  but  we  are  informed  in  1  Kings,  6:1, 
that  from  coming  out  of  Egypt  to  building  of  the  Temple  was 
480.  Now  there  were  40  years  of  wandering  in  wilderness  ;  7 
in  conquest  of  Canaan  ;  40  in  judgeship  of  Eli ;  40  of  Saul's 
reign ;  40  of  David's ;  4  of  Solomon's,  when  the  temple  began 

12 


90  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

building,  making  a  total  of  171  years,  without  counting  the 
several  intervals  of  rest  and  judgeship  of  Samuel.  From  this 
it  would  appear  that  not  quite  300  years  intervene  between 
Joshua  and  Samuel.  Paul  says  the  period  of  Judges  compre- 
hended about  450  years,  which  is  obtained  by  adding  410  above 
mentioned  to  the  40  years  of  Eli,  The  chronology  of  this 
period  is  very  difficult.  Some  critics  say  the  numbers  given 
are  mythical  and  not  reliable.  The  opinion  is  based  upon  the 
fact  that  the  number  40  occurs  so  often.  Thus  the  period  from 
the  Exode  to  the  building  of  the  temple  was  12  x  40  =  480. 
Forty  years  of  wandering,  of  Saul,  of  Eli,  &c.,  remarkable 
series  of  round  numbers.  Not  necessary  to  assume,  however, 
that  they  are  exact,  only  approximate.  For  1.  They  do  not 
occur  together  but  are  selected  from  a  series.  2.  The  chrono- 
logical difficulty  shows  that  the  numbers  were  real,  otherwise 
they  would  have  been  made  to  tally.  Others  suppose  1  Kings, 
6  :  1,  erroneous,  and  substitute  592  on  the  authority  of  Josephus, 
(Ant.  Bk.  10  ch.  8,  sec.  6).  But  we  answer:  1.  Josephus  not 
consistent  with  himself.  In  book  20,  chap.  10  he  gives  the  num- 
ber as  612.  2.  No  various  readings  on  this  passage.  The 
only  discrepancy  is  in  LXX.  But  here  the  number  is  made 
less,  440.  Mistake  accounted  for  by  letters.  1  Kings,  6  :  1,  is 
confirmed  by  Egyptian  monuments  recording  the  exploits  of 
Shishak  who  invaded  Palestine.  Some  assume  an  error  in  1 
Kings,  6:1;  assumption  based  on  Acts  13  :  20.  450  years, 
rule  of  Judges  from  Joshua  to  Samuel,  number  made  out  by 
adding  to  the  aggregate  of  years  mentioned  in  Judges,  the  40 
years  of  Eli's  judgeship,  bringing  time  down  to  Samuel.  Paul 
did  not  design  to  give  exact  chronology,  but  simply  gives  a 
hasty  review  of  God's  dealing  with  His  people.  Precise  state- 
ment not  necessary.  Many  years  in  one  as  in  case  of  modern 
Bible,  and  Tract  Societies.  If  one  man  works  6  months, 
another  8,  another  10,  they  sum  up  the  whole  as  2  years'  work, 
though  it  was  done  in  less  than  1  year. 

The  remaining  assumption  is,  that  the  whole  sum  must  be 
abbreviated.  Some  numbers  must  be  included  in  others,  or 
cover  the  same  period.    There  are  various  ways  of  abbreviating. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  91 

1.  Some  think  periods  of  oppression  are  not  additional  to 
judgeships,  but  included  in  them,  e.  g.,  3  :  8,  states  that  Israel 
served  Mesopotamia  eight  years :  verse  11  gives  a  rest  of 
forty  years;  but  period  of  rest  includes  time  from  beginning 
of  oppression.    Difficulty  here ;  it  does  not  agree  with  the  text. 

2.  Line  of  chronological  succession  is  to  be  computed  by  line 
of  the  six  Judges  mentioned  in  detail,  omitting  those  merely 
mentioned.     This  is  untenable. 

3.  Most  favorable  : — The  assumption  of  parallel  lines  of 
judges  in  different  parts  of  the  book.  Simplest  is  that  numbers 
given  succeed  in  chronological  order  until  judgeship  of  Jair  (10: 
3).  In  11 :  26,  it  is  said  Israel  had  occupied  the  land  for  300 
years  up  to  this  time.  Then  began  the  oppression  of  Ammon- 
ites in  the  easi;  and  Philistines  in  the  west,  (10 :  7).  Jeptha 
in  the  east  was  contemporaneous  with  Samson  in  west.  The 
forty  years  oppression  under  the  Philistines  in  the  days  of  Sam- 
som  lasted  till  victory  of  Samuel.  So  Eli  was  contemporaneous 
with  events  of  book  of  Judges  and  with  Samson.  This  is  in  accord- 
ance with  text.  The  general  credibility  accepted  for  most  part. 
Offence,  however,  is  taken  at  the  parts  relating  to  the  superna- 
tural events  recorded.  These  are  attributed  to  legends.  At- 
tempts have  been  made  to  separate  the  natural  from  the 
miraculous. 

Reply  :  1.  The  natural  is  so  interwoven  with  the  miraculous 
that  it  is  impossible  to  separate  them. 

2.  The  extraordinary  character  of  the  period  called  for  divine 
interposition.  If  Israel  be  confessed  to  be  the  covenant  people 
of  God  and  needed  special  aid  at  this  period,  it  is  not  surprising 
that  God  should  raise  up  special  deliverers  and  endow  them  in 
a  special  manner.  The  appearance  of  the  angel  of  the  Lord  in 
2:1;  6  :  12 ;   13  :  3,  is  in  accordance  with  0.  T.  analogy. 

3.  Gross  sins  and  imperfections  of  some  of  the  Judges  not 
inconsistent  with  their  being  divine  instruments.  This  applies 
especially  to  Jeptha  and  Samson,  as  they  represented  the  office 
in  its  lowest  form.  They  show  us  how  low  the  morals  of  the 
people  must  have  been.  The  theocratic  spirit  had  almost  died 
out.     15 :    11   and   13,  show   the  extent  of   this  debasement. 


92  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

They  gave  up  their  deliverer  to  their  worst  enemies.  Samson 
was  appointed  to  arouse  the  people  from  despair  and  inflame 
their  national  enthusiasm.  He  was  to  begin  the  reformation 
(13  :  5).  Samuel  completed  what  Samson  had  begun.  Although 
all  good  had  almost  vanished,  yet  God  did  not  disdain  to  lend 
a  helping  hand  to  His  people. 

4.  These  imperfections  of  Samson  show  him  to  be  not  an 
ideal,  but  a  real  person,  and  facts  related  of  him  are  not  ficti- 
tious. We  should  not  have  seen  in  him  such  a  mixture  of  good 
and  bad  had  he  been  an  ideal  person.  He  would  not  have 
married  a  Philistine  woman,  nor  would  he  have  died  on  account 
of  his  own  gross  sins. 

5.  As  to  his  deeds  of  superhuman  strength,  they  belong  to 
the  close  of  the  period  near  the  time  of  the  writing  of  the  book, 
and  so  we  have  a  fresh  voucher  for  their  reality. 

6.  They  were  not  mere  deeds  of  superhuman  strength. 
Some  have  compared  them  with  those  of  Hercules.  A  certain 
writer  has  gone  so  far  as  to  institute  a  comparison  between  the 
two,  and  has  brought  out  twelve  deeds  of  greatness  in  each 
case;  this  is  forced.  The  people  were  too  weak  to  act  for 
themselves.  Samson  was  their  great  champion  in  whom  was 
fulfilled  the  prediction,  "one  should  chase  a  thousand."  He 
awakened  a  new  consciousness  of 'nationality  among  the  people, 
and  prepared  them  for  their  coming  deliverance  under  Samuel. 
These  acts  might  seem  to  stand  alone,  but  when  we  consider  the 
character  of  the  period,  we  find  them  the  best  adapted  to  the 
end  in  view. 

Alleged  further,  that  the  state  of  things  under  Judges  is 
inconsistent  with  the  assertion  that  the  Pentateuch  with  its 
regulations  was  then  in  existence.  This  the  stronghold  of 
those  who  deny  the  Pentateuch. 

I.  In  regard  to  the  sanctuary.  It  is  contended  that  sacrifices 
were  offered  in  a  multitude  of  places,  instead  of  one  place  as 
prescribed  by  the  Mosaic  law.  Hence,  that  law  could  not  have 
existed  then  or  been  in  force.  Places  mentioned  are  in  2 :  15  ; 
6:18;  13  :  16 ;  20 :  18  and  26 ;  1  Sam.  6  :  14  and  15 ;  7:9; 
7:  17;  9:  12;  10:  8;   11:  15;   16:  2;  20:  6.     Two  passages 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  93 

are  omitted  from  this  list,  Judges  11:  11  and  20:  1,  because 
there  is  no  implication  of  the  fact  asserted.  If  we  examine  the 
above  passages,  we  will  find  nothing  in  them  but  certain  irregu- 
larities due  to  an  anomalous  state  of  things.  No  evidence  of 
violation  of  law  by  true  worshipers  of  God.  There  is  abundant 
evidence  of  the  existence  of  the  law.  Two  do  not  contradict 
the  letter  of  the  law,  Bethel  and  Bethshemesh.  Explanation 
of  sacrifice  at  Bethel  is  in  20 :  27.  The  ark  was  there,  and 
where  it  was  located  there  God  made  His  abode.  The  only- 
lawful  place  of  sacrifice  was  where  God  was.  Indications  that 
the  ark  was  only  temporarily  there:  1.  "In  those  days," 
(20 :  27) ;  also,  "  Build  an  altar,"  (21 :  4),  which  would  not  be 
necessary  if  that  was  its  permanent  place.  2.  After  the  war 
was  over  the  whole  camp  repaired  again  to  Shiloh,  (21  :  12  and 
21 :  19 ;  18  :  31).  3.  Confirmed  by  the  position  of  Bethel.  It 
was  in  the  territory  of  Benjamin,  near  the  seat  of  war,  at 
Gibeah.  The  ark  was  carried  there  for  convenience  during  the 
war,  (1  Sam.  4  :  4). 

In  regard  to  Bethshemesh,  sacrifices  are  justified  here  because 
it  was  in  the  presence  of  the  ark  on  its  return  from  the  Philis- 
tines. All  other  passages  refer  to  sacrifices  made  upon  some 
extraordinary  manifestation  of  God's  presence.  Ordinarily 
sacrifice  was  limited  to  the  tabernacle.  But  wherever  God 
manifested  Himself  specially,  worship  was  to  be  rendered. 
When  manifestation  ceased,  at  that  point  sacrifice  ceased.  This 
principle  will  explain  all  the  passages.  In  no  instance  was  sac- 
rifice offered  unless  God's  presence  was  known  to  be  there.  At 
Bochim,  (Manoah,  &c.),  "the"  not  "an"  "Angel  of  the  Lord 
appeared,"  God  Himself.  If  it  be  said  that  these  manifestations 
were  mythical,  then  the  sacrifices  were  also. 

Objections. — Alleged  that  Gideon  established  a  permanent 
Sanctuary  at  Ophrah  (6  :  24) ;  and  it  is  inferred  that  sacrifices 
continued  there.  But  the  writer  does  not  say  so.  Altar  might 
remain,  but  this  does  not  imply  its  use.  We  have  no  evidence 
that  Gideon  used  it.  He  built  another,  (26).  It  seems  to  have 
been  only  a  memorial  altar,  Joshua  22  :  26.  Observe  also  the 
lancruage  of  the  Angel  at  Bochim,  (2 :  2-3).     Allusion  to  the 


94  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

Pentateuch  (Dent,  7 :  2  and  5,  Num.  33  :  55).    This  shows  that 
Pentateuch  then  existed. 

The  sacrifices  offered  by  Samuel  in  different  parts  of  the  land 
require  a  different  explanation,  because  a  different  state  of  things 
existed.  The  ark  had  been  taken  by  the  Philistines,  Israel  con- 
sequently had  no  sanctuary.  When  it  was  again  brought  back 
it  was  not  again  set  up  at  Shiloh,  but  deposited  in  a  private 
house  at  Kirjath  Jearim  until  David's  time.  It  remained  there 
in  obscurity.  No  sacrifices  were  offered ;  no  sanctuary.  In  the 
time  of  David  the  Lord  chose  Mt.  Zion,  (1  Sam.  21 :  1-6).  Ark 
also  taken  to  Nob,  then  to  Gibeah,  but  only  temporarily.  Ps. 
78 :  60-63,  indicates  that  the  Lord  forsook  Shiloh  and  chose 
Zion.  No  other  place  mentioned  during  the  interval.  Israel 
was  without  a  sanctuary  and  sacrifices  were  necessarily  offered 
elsewhere,  specially  at  holy  places.  This  explanation  is  suffi- 
cient without  saying  that  the  ark  was  present  everywhere  Sam- 
uel offered  sacrifices.  It  was  in  retirement  at  Kirjath  Jearim 
when  David  sent  for  it.  It  is  expressly  said  that  the  ark  was 
not  resorted  to  in  time  of  Saul,  (1  Chron.  13  :  3).  Presence 
of  the  ark  in  1  Sam.  7  :  6,  not  necessary.  Chap.  7  :  2,  does  not 
indicate  that  the  ark  was  taken  to  Mizpah.  It  was  taken  after- 
wards to  Mt.  Zion.  The  only  violation  of  Pentateuch  is  in  17  : 
5,  when  Micah  established  a  sanctuary  in  his  own  house.  The 
writer  shows  his  estimate  of  this  in  6  v.  Such  a  deed  by  a 
renegade  does  not  prove  the  non-existence  of  the  law.  On  the 
contrary,  there  are  clear  proofs  that  it  did  exist.  In  19 :  18, 
mention  is  made  of  the  House  of  the  Lord ;  18  :  31,  "  House  of 
God  at  Shiloh  ;"  21 :  9,  annual  feast;  1  Sam.  1 :  7-24,  "  House 
of  the  Lord;"  3:15;  1:9;  3:3;  2:22,  "Temple  of  the 
Lord,"  applied  to  the  Mosaic  sanctuary,  but  afterwards  to  the 
Temple  of  Solomon.  To  this  spot,  all  offerings  were  brought. 
Here  the  people  offered  before  the  Lord  ;  here  feasts  were  kept ; 
here  ark  rested.  1  Sam.  3  :  21 ;  2  :  28  and  33 ;  1  :  22,  in 
accordance  with  Deut.  16 :  16.  Candle-stick  was  at  Shiloh,  (1 
Sam.  3  :  3).  Also,  the  ark  and  Cherubim,  4:4;  4:7;  2  Sam. 
7 :  6.  Mosaic  Taberacle  was  the  Dwelling  of  God,  (Ps.  78 :  60 
and  68).  God  had  but  two  sanctuaries  in  Israel,  Shiloh  and 
Mt.  Zion,  (Jer.  7:  12-14). 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  95. 

II.  Objections  raised  in  reference  to  the  existence  of  the 
Mosaic  Priesthood  in  the  time  of  Judges,  because  sacrifices 
were  ofi"ered  by  others.  But  the  priests  existed  then  as 
described  in  the  Mosaic  Law.  Offering  sacrifice  was  not  the 
exclusive  ofiice  of  the  priest.  Reference  is  made  by  objectors 
to  the  case  of  Manoah  and  Gideon.  No  evidence  that  they  did 
so  permanently.  Only  on  one  occasion,  and  this  only  when  a 
special  divine  manifestation  authorized  them  so  to  do.  This 
was  their  authority  for  offering,  just  as  when  there  was 
a  special  manifestation  in  certain  places  sacrifices  were 
ofi'ered.  So  also  is  the  case  of  Samuel  referred  to,  who  it  is 
claimed  was  not  even  a  Levite,  but  an  Ephraimite  (1  Sam.  1  : 
1).  This  is  explained  by  the  provisional  state  of  things  during 
his  life.  On  account  of  the  corruption  of  the  priesthood  (1 
Sam.  2 :  22),  Samuel  was  clothed  with  authority  from  God  to 
ofi"er  in  the  place  of  the  priests  (1  Sam.  2  :  35).  No  others 
were  allowed  to  do  so  unless  authorized  by  God  (1  Sam.  12  : 
12-14).  Samuel  would  not  have  been  allowed  to  do  so  unless 
a  Levite.  His  father  is  called  an  Ephrathite  (1  Sam.  1  :  1), 
but  this  proves  nothing.  He  was  a  Levite  (1  Chron.  6  :  22-28). 
This  genealogy  is  real  and  not  invented,  else  he  would  be  repre- 
sented as  a  son  of  Aaron.  Confirmed  by  fact  that  his  father 
was  named  Elkanah.  All  of  this  name  belonged  to  the 
Levites.     Meaning  of  name  in  Num.  3  :  12. 

Objected,  that  he  would  be  obliged  to  serve  in  the  sanctuary 
without  the  need  of  the  vow  of  his  mother.  But  the  service 
did  not  begin  until  25th  year.  He  was  given  to  the  Lord  from 
his  youth. 

Objected  again,  that  the  men  of  Bethshemesh  offered  sacri- 
fices, (1  Sam.  6 :  15).  But  there  is  no  difficulty  here  as  Beth- 
shemesh was  a  city  of  priests,  (Josh.  21 :  16),  and  the  men  were 
priests. 

Another  objection  taken  from  1  Sam.  2 :  13,  15,  where  it  is 
said  any  man  offered  sacrifice.  But:  1.  The  same  expression 
is  used  in  the  law,  (Lev.  17  :  5  and  7 ;  Deut.  16  :  2).  2.  Persons 
charged  with  burning  fat  were  different  from  those  who  brought 
the  victim,  (I  Sam.  2 :  15).     3.  Not  necessary  to  suppose  that 


96  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

the  men  themselves  oflFered.  Persons  are  often  said  to  do  things 
which  they  do  through  others,  e.  g.,  Joshua  built  an  altar 
though  perhaps  not  with  his  own  hands. 

Objected  again,  that  there  could  not  have  been  a  numerous 
priesthood  as  only  Eli,  his  sons,  and  Samuel  are  mentioned. 
But :  1.  The  narrative  does  not  imply  that  these  were  the  only 
ones.  2.  Hophni  and  Phineas  are  spoken  of  as  priests,  not  the 
priests  of  the  Lord,  (1  Sara.  1  :  13),  implying  that  there  were 
others.     Also,  in  2 :  14,  15,  others  are  implied. 

Objection  derived  from  the  history  of  Micah,  who  made  his 
own  son  priest,  (Jud.  17  :  5).  But  we  answer  that  he  after- 
wards appointed  a  Levite  to  fill  his  place,  (12  v).  He  also 
knew  that  his  son  had  no  authority  to  ofier,  which  is  proved 
from  13  v.,  "now  I  know,''  &c. 

1  Sam.  7  :  1,  (Abinadab)  does  not  show  that  others  than  the 
descendants  of  Aaron  could  perform  sacred  functions.  Abinadab 
only  took  care  of  the  ark  and  did  not  perform  priestly  duties. 

III.  Dress  of  priests  objected  to  in  Judges.  Discrepancies 
are  alleged  between  Pentateuch  on  one  hand,  and  Samuel  and 
Judges  on  the  other,  in  regard  to  dress  of  priests,  (Exodus  28  : 
4  and  18;  2:  28).  In  the  latter  passage  the  Ephod  is  only 
mentioned  because  it  belongs  exclusively  to  H.  P.,  1  Sam.  37 : 
7  ;  14  :  3  ;  23  :  9. 

Definite  article  used  in  two  of  these  passages  associated  with 
H.  P.  In  these  following  passages,  1  Sam.  2  :  18  ;  22  :  18 ;  2 
Sam.  6 :  14,  it  refers  to  other  priests,  in  which  not  the  Ephod 
is  spoken  of  but  the  linen  Ephod.  The  dignity  of  the  H.  P.'s 
Ephod  shown  by  its  use  in  Num.  27  :  21 ;  also  a  superstitious 
use  made  of  it,  (Judges  8:  27  ;  17  :  5). 

There  is  positive  evidence  for  the  existence  of  Mosaic  institu- 
tions in  time  of  Judges.  Three  grades  of  priests  are  found 
performing  their  functions  :  1.  Levites.  2.  Priests.  3.  High 
Priest. 

1.  Levites,  (Judges  17:  13). — Levites  had  their  residence 
within  the  limits  of  the  other  tribes,  (17  :  7 ;  19 :  1).  They 
had  their  duties  at  the  House  of  the  Lord,  19 :  18.  When  the 
ark  returned  from  the  Philistines  the  Levites  received  it,  (1 
Sam.  6 :  15). 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  97 

2.  Priests. — Their  prerogatives  accorded  with  the  Mosaic 
regulations,  (1  Sam,  2 :  28).  There  was  only  one  priesthood  ; 
V.  36  implies  that  there  were  priests  in  considerable  numbers. 

3.  High  Priest. — His  office  was  perpetual,  (Judges  20  :  28  ; 
Num.  25 :  13).  At  close  of  the  period  Eli  was  High  Priest,  (1 
Sam.  1:9  and  2:  11). 

One  of  the  most  perplexing  questions  in  the  book  is  the  vow 
of  Jeptha,  (Jud.  20 :  28;  Num.  25  :  13).     There  is  a  difficulty 
as  to  its  precise  purport.     Not  that  there  is  obscurity  in  text 
or  ambiguity  of  language,  for  there  is  neither.     The  fact  in 
itself  is   revolting,   and  shocks  the  sensibilities  of  our  nature. 
So  much  so,  that  we  can  scarce  avoid  disbelieving  and  explain- 
ing it  away.     Jeptha  was  an  Israelite  and  a  prominent  man. 
Human  sacrifices  did  occur  sometimes  and  that  of  one's  own 
child.     This,  however,  was  only  when  Israel  was  led  away  (2 
Kings  17  :  17)  into  idolatry  and  worshiped  Moloch.     If  Jeptha 
had  been  an  idolater,  the  difficulty  would  be  explained ;  but  he 
was  not.     His  vow  was  made  to  the  Lord,  and  for  this  reason 
was  considered  binding.     It  is  said  that  the  spirit  of  the  Lord 
came  upon  him,  (11 :  29).     Besides,  his  faith  is  commended  in 
Heb.  11 :  32.     Could  a  worshiper  of  Jehovah  have  ofi'ered  his 
own  child  ?     It  seems  abhorrent,  but  is  narrated  without  any 
apparent  feeling  by  the  writer.     The  temptation  at  first  is  to 
pass  from  the  obvious  sense  and  find  relief  elsewhere.     Various 
explanations  have  been  made  :     1.  The  marginal  reading  of  the 
common  version  makes  vow  disjunctive:     "Or"  I  will  ofi^r  it 
to  the  Lord.     It  depended  on  what  came  forth  to  meet  him. 
If  a  clean  animal,  it  was  to  be  sacrificed;  if  not,  it  was  to  be 
consecrated  in  some  other  way.     Jeptha's  daughter  was  conse- 
crated to  a  life  of  virginity.     "  And  she  knew  no  man,"  (39th  v.), 
i.  e.,  in    consequence    of  vow.     Such    vows   were   customary. 
"  Lament,"  in  40th  v.,  is  then  interpreted,  "  to  talk  with."     She 
was  not  sacrificed,  but  forced  to  lead  a  secluded  life.     The  diffi- 
culties to  this  view  are  insuperable.     The  radical  one  is,  from 
the  language,  Jeptha  could  have  meant  nothing  else  but  a  per- 
son ;   xohosoever,  and  not  whatsoever.     For  : 

1.  He  spoke  of  a  coming  forth  from  the  door  of  his  house. 

13 


98  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

2.  "  To  meet  him."  This  language  could  only  be  used  of  an 
intelligent  welcome  and  not  that  of  any  brute.  It  most  naturally 
would  be  the  one  that  loved  him  the  best.  Herein  consists  the 
greatness  of  the  vow.  His  daughter  must  have  been  in  his  mind, 
but  he  hoped  that  it  would  be  some  one  else,  a  slave  perhaps. 

3.  The  vow  would  be  insignificant  were  it  a  mere  animal. 
A  stray  animal,  not  even  best  of  the  flock.  The  peculiar  form 
of  the  vow  would  have  no  meaning  unless  it  referred  to  a  per- 
son. It  was  customary  to  meet  returning  victors  with  singing, 
timbrels  and  dancing. 

Another  view  is  that  of  Clark.  He  renders  last  clause,  "  I 
will  offer  him  a  burnt  offering,"  referring  the  suffix  to  God, 
making  it  dative  instead  of  accusative.  The  one  meeting  him 
should  be  consecrated  to  God  and  a  burnt  offering  offered. 
This  is  unworthy  the  occasion.  A  burnt  offering  would  be 
offered  of  course. 

Still  another  view  is  the  interpretation  of  Moses,  Kimchi, 
Hengtsenberg,  &c.  As  the  vow  contemplated  a  person  and  not 
an  animal  the  language  must  be  interpreted  according  to  the 
necessities  of  the  case  and  as  permitted  by  the  law.  It  could 
be  only  in  the  sense  of  figurative  or  spiritual  sacrifice.  Human 
sacrmce  was  out  of  the  question.  He  was  acquainted  with  the 
Pentateuch.  His  very  language  was  borrowed  from  it,  (Num. 
30 :  2).  He  could  not  have  been  so  ignorant  as  to  break  the 
law.  It  must  have  meant  life-long  consecration  to  God.  Hengs- 
tenberg  justifies  this  sense  by  figurative  use  of  word  "  sacrifice" 
in  Scripture,  (Eom.  12 :  1 ;  15  :  16 ;  Phil.  4  :  18 ;  Heb.  13  :  15-16 ; 
Ps.  51 :  17  ;  40 :  7-9 ;  Hosea  14  :  2).  Jeptha  thus  considered 
his  daughter  as  surrendered  to  the  Lord,  as  was  Samuel,  (1 
Sam.  1 :  11-28).  Hengstenberg  then  attempts  to  show  that 
such  vows  were  not  unusual.  Law  of  vows.  Lev.  27.  Persons 
might  be  released  by  paying  ransoms.  But  persons  might  go 
beyond  the  law  on  unusual  occasions  and  give  up  their  right  of 
release.  So  Jeptha.  Hengstenberg  goes  still  further  and 
appeals  to  Nazarite  vows,  (Num.  6).  Vows  were  extended  to 
women.  It  was  limited  generally,  but  could  extend  over  the 
whole  life,  as  in  case  of  Samson  and  Samuel.  Marriage  per- 
mitted to  men  but  not  to  the  women. 


Bo  OK  OF  Ruth. 


Position  of  Euth  in  the  Hebrew  and  English  bibles,  and 
ancient  catalogues.  It  is  not  an  appendix  to  Judges ;  pecu- 
liarity of  character. 

A.     DESIGN. 

The  design  is  not  (1)  to  maintain  the  obligation  of  the 
Levirate  marriages  ;  nor  (2)  to  exhibit  the  reward  of  piety  ; 
nor  (3)  to  correct  Jewish  illiberality ;  but  (4)  to  preserve 
incidents  connected  with  the  ancestry  of  David  (4 :  17). 

B.  TIME. 

The  events  recorded  took  place  in  the  time  of  Judges. 
"  Now  it  came  to  pass  in  the  days  when  the  Judges  ruled  that 
there  was  a  famine  in  the  land  "  (1 :  1).  This  is  more  pre- 
cisely determined,  not  (1)  by  identifying  the  famine  of  1 :  1  with 
the  ravages  of  the  Midianites  recorded  in  Judges  6 :  3-7  ;  nor 
(2)  by  reference  to  the  genealogy  of  Boaz,  grandson  of  Nahshon 
(4 :  20-21),  a  contemporary  of  Moses  (Num.  1 :  17),  for  the 
genealogy  is  abridged  ;  nor  (3)  under  Eli  and  after  death  of 
Samson  (Josephus).  But  (4)  time  is  more  definitely  deter- 
mined by  4 :  17.  Obed  was  the  grandfather  of  David,  and  the 
son  of  Ruth. 

C.  DATE. 

1.  That  it  was  written  after  the  erection  of  the  kingdom  is 
implied  in  the  expression  "  in  the  days  when  the  judges  ruled  " 
(1 :  1).  2.  It  was  written  after  David's  accession  to  the  throne 
(4  :  17-22).  Alleged  Chaldaeisms  and  altered  usage  (4  :  7)  do 
not  prove  late  date,  in  or  after  the  time  of  the  captivity. 
1.  Interest  of  the  subject  diminished  or  lost.  2.  Marriage 
with  the  Moabitess  not  condemned. 


Book  of  Samuel 


The  period  of  transition  from  the  Judges  to  the  kingdom  is 
grouped  about  three  lives  : 

I.  That  of  Samuel,  contained  in  1  Sam.  chaps.  1-12. 
II.  The  public  life  of  Saul,  contained  in  chaps.  13-31. 
III.  The  public  life  of  David,  contained  in  2  Samuel,  chaps. 

1-24. 
The  two  books  form  one  work.     The  division  into  two  books 
was  first  made  by  the   LXX,  and  was  first  adopted  into  the 
Hebrew  text  by  Bomberg  in   1518.     They  do  not  form  one 
work  with  Kings. 

This  has  been  argued  : 

1.  Because  they  are  connected  by  a  common   title  in   the 

LXX,  but  not  80  in  the  Hebrew. 

2.  They  form  a  continuous  history  but  are  distinct  in  plan 

and  in  the  period  which  each  covers. 

3.  Samuel  is  no  fitting  termination  since  it  does  not  record 

David's  death ;  but  it  completes  his  public  life.     His 
last  words  recorded  in  23  :  1-7.     The  transfer  of  the 
kingdom   to  Solomon  opens  a  new  period  upon  which 
the  writer  did  not  design  to  enter. 
They  are  shown  to  be  distinct  from  Kings : 

1.  By  a  difi^rence  in  the  plan.     Kings  is   not  biographical 

and  therefore  has  fewer  details. 

2.  By  a  citation  of  sources. 

3.  By  exact  chronology. 

4.  By  the  time  of  their  composition. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  101 

DATE. 

This  is  not  hefore  David's  death,  though   that  is  not  men- 
tioned. 

The  criteria  are  somewhat  indefinite,  owing  doubtless  to  : 

1.  A  change  in  terms  and  customs,  1  Sam.  9 :  9,  Prophet, 

Seer,  2  Sam.  13  :  18,  dress  of  the  king's  daughter. 

2.  1  Sam.  27  :  6,  Kings  of  Judah,  after  the  schism,  but  not 

necessarily  long  after. 


Book 'of  Kings. 


Name. — The  period  covered. 

Divisions. — I.  Eeiga  of  Solomon,  1  Kings  1-11. 
II.  The  schism  and  the  synchronous  history  of  the   two 
kingdoms  of  Judah  and  Israel,   1  Kings   12  and  2 
Kings  17. 

III.  History  of  Judah,  alone,  until  the  time  of  the  Babylo- 
nish captivity,  2  Kings  18-25. 

The  division  into  two  books  was  made  by  the  LXX. 

The  books  were  not  written  piecemeal,  but  are  one  continuous 
production.     Shown  in — 

1.  Unity  of  plan. 

2.  Careful  chronology. 

3.  Recurring  expressions. 

4.  Sameness  of  language  and  style. 

God's  fidelity  to  his  covenant  with  David,  even  in  the  midst 
of  His  just  judgment  for  Israel's  provocations,  here  receives 
illustration. 

Sources  from  which  the  books  are  written. 

1.  Book  of  the  acts  of  Solomon,  1  Kings  11 :  41. 

2.  Book  of  Chronicles  of  the  kings  of  Judah. 

3.  Book  of  Chronicles  of  the  kings  of  Israel. 
About  these  there  are  different  opinions. 

Note  the  expression  "  unto  this  day,"  1  Kings  8 :  8,  etc. 

Date. — 1.  It  was  after  the  thirty-seventh  year  of  Jehoiachin's 
captivity. 

2.  It  was  before  the  close  of  the  captivity. 

Author. — Tradition  ascribes  it  to  Jeremiah.  There  is  a 
similarity  of  style  and  language  to  be  noticed  between  Jeremiah 
52 :  1,  and  2  Kings  24 :  18,  etc.  But  it  is  doubtful  whether 
Jeremiah  lived  so  long.  They  were  probably  written  in  Babylon 
by  some  author  now  unknown. 


Book  of  Chronicles. 


Give  the  different  names  in  Hebrew,  Greek  and  English. 
One  work,  though  divided  into  two  books  by  LXX.     Date 
inferred. 

A.  From  the  limit  of  the  history,  2  Chron,  36 :  22  and  23, 
first  year  of  Cyrus,  proclamation  made  to  build  house  at  Jeru- 
salem. 

B.  Limit  of  genealogies,  1  Chron.  3  :  19-21,  grandsons  of 
Zerubbabel,  not  descendants  of  seventh  generation  ;  also,  verses 
22-24,  grandsons  of  Neariah,  brother  of  Hattush,  comp.  Ezra, 
8:2. 

a  1  Chron.  9 :  17  and  18,  comp.  Neh.  12 :  25  and  26,  refers 
to  the  porters  who  wait  at  the  king's  gate. 

D.  1  Chron.  29  :  7,  mention  of  Darics  not  spoken  of  as  exist- 
ing in  the  days  of  David.  Objected  that  first  coined  by  Darius 
Hystaspes.     Answer  : 

I.  Sufficient  time  had  elapsed  for  them  to  have  been  circu- 
lated through  the  empire. 
XL  Mentioned  in  Ezra  2  :  69  ;  8  :  27  ;  Neh.  7  :  70-72. 
III.  Perhaps  named  from  Darius,  the  uncle  of  Cyrus,  or  as 
the  general  term  for  king. 

JS.  1  Chron.  29 :  1,  19,  the  word  Bira  is  applied  to  temple ; 
hence,  before  the  castle  so  called  was  built,  Neh.  2:8;  7:2. 

F.  Collection  of  the  canon. 

G.  2  Chron.  36 :  22  and  23,  comp.  Ezra  1 :  1-3,  both  refer 
to  building  of  house  at  Jerusalem. 

Book  of  Ezra  not  a  continuation  of  Chronicles,  but  perhaps 
Chronicles  written  by  Ezra.     Because  : 
I.  Tradition. 
II.  Verses  repeated. 
III.  Similarity  of  style  and  expression. 


104  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

CONTENTS. 

A.  Genealogies,  1  Chron.  1-9  : 
I.  Chap.  1  is  preliminary. 

II.  Chap.  2  to  8,  genealogies  of  the  various  tribes  of  Israel. 
III.  Chap.  3  supplementary. 

B.  History. 

I.  1  Chron.  10-29,  reign  of  David. 
II.  2  Chron.  1-9,  reign  of  Solomon. 

III.  2  Chron.  10-36,  schism  and  subsequent  history  of  Judah. 
Chap.  1  from  Adam  to  Israel,  its  double  design,  plan,  drawn 
from  Genesis. 

A.  All  found  there. 

B.  Forms  and  expressions. 

C.  Improbable  that  other  genealogies  were  preserved  from 
that  early  period. 

Abridgement,  1 :  1,  4  ;  sons  of  Shem,  verse  17  ;  Timna,  verse 
36. 

Chaps.  2-8,  not  from  preceding  books  of  S.  S. 

A.  Most  of  names  new ;  or 

B.  Merely  in  historical  passages  not  genealogical  lists. 

C.  Variations,  yet  not  irreconcilable,  many  undesigned  coin- 
cidences and  corroborations. 

D.  Eepetitions  in  Chron.,  e.  g.,  Sam.  6  :  22-28;  comp.  verses 
33-38,  Saul. 

S.  Facts  not  elsewhere  recorded. 

G.  If  already  found  in  previous  books,  their  transcription 
needless. 

No  fictitious : 

A.  No  motive  for  their  invention. 

B.  Lack  of  uniformity,  not  conformed  to  other  books  of  S.  S. 

C.  Practical  needs  of  the  times.  Derived  from  public  and 
family  registers ;  few  from  Ten  Tribes,  none  from  Zebulon,  and 
Dan.,  chap.  9,  list  of  prominent  residents  of  Jerusalem  and  those 
connected  with  ministry  of  temple.  Correspond  with  Neh.  11, 
discrepancies  how  explained  :  verse  35-44  family  of  Saul,  pre- 
paratory to  the  history. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  105 

Two  series  of  historical  sections  : 

A.  Parallel  to  Samuel  and  Kings ;     B.  Peculiar  to  Chron- 
icles. 

A.  Parallel  sections  probably  not  taken  directly  from  those 
books,  but  in  both  drawn  from  a  common  source. 

I.  Transpositions,  e.  g.,  1  Chron.  11-15. 
XL   Additions. 

III.  Variations. 

IV.  References  in  both  to  other  works  as  sources. 

B.  Peculiar  sections  based  on  reliable  authorities. 
I.  Contrary  supposition  incredible. 

II.  Analogy  of  genealogies. 

III.  Incidental  corroboration  in  Psalms  and  Prophets. 

IV.  "  Unto  this  day."     2  Chron.  5:9,  "  And  they  drew  out 

the  staves  of  the  ark,  that  the  ends  of  the  staves  were 
seen  from  the  ark  before  the  oracle ;  but  they  were 
not  seen  without.     And  there  it  is  unto  this  day." 
2  Chron.  8:8,     "  But  of   their  children,   who  were 
left  after  them  in  the  land,  whom  the  children  of 
Israel  consumed  not,  them  did  Solomon  make  to  pay 
tribute  until  this,  day." 
V.  Existence  of  and  frequent  references  to  other  accredited 
histories. 
Deviations  from  Samuel  and  Kings  prove  the  independence 
of  Chronicles,  but  not  discredit  it  if  capable  of  being  harmo- 
nized ;  also  show  distinct  design,  not  in  period  treated,  nor  class 
of  readers  addressed,  but  the  point  of  view  from  which   the 
history  is  contemplated  and  the  objects  rendered  prominent. 
Samuel  biographical  history.    Kings  national  theocratic  history 
of  both  kingdoms.     Chronicles  liturgical  history,  hence  omits 
reign  of  Saul,  personal  history  of  David  and  Solomon,  kingdom 
of  ten  tribes,  but  full  details  respecting  temple  and  its  worship, 
adapted  to  necessities  of  returning  exiles. 


14 


Book  of  Ezra. 


This  book  is  divided  into  two  parts : 

I.  The  first  part  includes  chapters  1-6.  This  part  contains 
an  account  of  the  first  colony  that  returned  from  the  Babylonish 
captivity  under  the  lead  of  Zerubbabel.  See  Ezra  2  :  1,  2.  It 
extends  to  the  completion  of  the  temple  in  the  sixth  year  of 
Darius  Hystaspes. 

II.  The  second  part  includes  chapters  7-10.  We  have  here 
an  account  of  the  second  colony  that  returned  from  the  Baby- 
lonish captivity  under  Ezra's  leadership  in  the  seventh  year  of 
Artaxerxes  Longimanus. 

Between  these  two  parts  there  is  an  interval  of  fifty-eight 
years,  during  which  time  the  events  recorded  in  the  book  of 
Esther  occur. 


ORIGINAL   DOCUMENTS. 

1.  In  part  I,  are  : 

(a)  Decree  of  Cyrus,  1:4.    • 

(6)  List  of  exiles  who  went  up  with  Zerubbabel,  2  chapter. 
See  also  Nehemiah  7 :  6//,  where  the  account  is 
repeated. 

(c)  Discrepancies  accounted  for.  Chaldee  section,  4 :  8-6: 
18,  which  was  probably  written  by  one  who  partici- 
pated in  the  transactions  which  it  records,  (chap.  5  :  4), 
and  this  was  incorporated  by  Ezra  in  his  book  contain- 
ing the  correspondence  between  the  Samaritans  and 
the  kings  Artaxerxes  (Smerdes)  and  Darius  4 :  11-16, 
17-22;  5:  7-17;  6:  2-12. 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  107 

2.  In  part  II,  are : 

(a)  Letter  of  Artaxerxes  empowering  Ezra  to  take  a  colony 
of  exiles  to  Jerusalem,  7  :  12-26. 

(6)  List  of  those  who  went  up  with  Ezra,  8  :  1-14. 

(c)  List  of  those  who  had  married  foreign  wives,  10:  18-44. 

The  book  claims  to  have  been  written  by  Ezra,  Ezra  7 :  28, 
and  also  8  and  9  chapters.  The  writer  uses  the  first  person. 
It  is  no  objection  to  this  proof  that  he  sometimes  used  the  third 
person  when  speaking  of  himself  as  in  chap.  7  :  1-11,  and  chap. 
10.  Nor  is  it  any  objection  that  he  is  called  "  a  ready  scribe 
in  the  law  of  Moses."  7 :  6,  etc. 


Book  of  Nehemiah. 


Nehemiah,  who  was  a  cup-bearer,  during  his  captivity,  to 
Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  (2 :  1),  came  up  in  the  twentieth  year 
of  this  monarch's  reign,  and  thirteen  years  after  Ezra's  return 
to  Jerusalem. 

This  book  is  divided  into  three  parts : 

I.  The  first  part  includes  chapters  1-7.  It  gives  an  account 
of  Nehemiah's  prayer,  and  permission  from  the  king  to  go  up 
to  Jerusalem,  and  of  his  labors  for  the  defence  and  rebuilding 
of  that  city. 

II.  This  part  includes  chapters  8-10.  It  gives  an  account  of 
the  religious  services  conducted  by  Ezra  and  the  Levites,  and 
the  covenant  sealed  by  the  people  under  the  lead  of  Nehemiah. 

III.  This  includes  chapters  11-13,  and  gives  an  account  of 
the  subsequent  acts  of  Nehemiah. 

The  book  is  announced  (1 :  1)  as  "the  words  of  Nehemiah." 
The  f,rst  person  is  used  throughout,  except  in  chaps.  8-10. 

Some  without  sufficient  reason,  refer  these  chapters  to  Ezra. 
Objection  to  the  genuineness  is  based  on   12:  10,   11,  22. 

Some  suspect  interpolation.     It  might  have  been  written  by 

Nehemiah. 


Book  of  Esther. 


The  plot  for  the  destruction  of  the  Jews  in  Persia  was 
brought  to  nought ;  and  their  deliverance  was  accomplished. 
In  commemoration  of  this  the  feast  of  Purira  was  instituted 
by  Esther  and  Mordecai. 

The  book  covers  a  period  of  nine  years,  extending  from  the 
third  to  the  twelfth  year  of  the  reign  of  Ahasuerus  (Xerxes). 

We  note  confirmations  from  profane  history,  the  character  of 
Ahasuerus,  extent  of  his  kingdom,  assembly  of  princes  in  the 
third  year  of  his  reign. 

Esther  was  not  made  queen  until  the  tenth  month  of  the 
seventh  year,  2  :  16.  "  So  Esther  was  taken  unto  king  Ahas- 
uerus, into  his  house  royal  in  the  tenth  month,  which  is  the 
month  Tebeth,  in  the  seventh  year  of  his  reign,"  Explained 
by  an  expedition  to  Greece  in  the  interval.  Splendor  of  the 
palace  in  Susa,  1 :  2,  6,  consulting  the  magi  on  all  occasions, 
1  :  13.  The  seven  princes  mentioned,  1  :  14.  The  harem  men- 
tioned also  in  2  :  8. 

The  monarch  was  regarded  as  the  incarnation  of  Deity.  The 
Grand  Vizier  was  the  representative  of  the  monarch,  and  on 
this  account  the  people  were  to  prostrate  themselves  before  him, 
3  :  2.  Mordecai,  for  religious  reasons,  refused  to  do  this.  Hence 
the  plot  by  Haman  to  put  all  the  Jews  to  death,  3  :  6.  This  is 
formulated  into  a  decree,  at  Haman's  request,  by  the  king's 
scribes,  3  :  12 ;  8:9;  and  is  proclaimed  throughout  all  the  127 
provinces  by  the  posts  of  the  king,  3  :  13  ;  8  :  14. 

The  truth  of  all  this  is  confirmed  by  the  existence  of  the 
feast  of  Purim  and  its  universal  celebration,  even  to  this  day, 
by  the  Jews.     Mentioned  in  2  Mace.  15  :  36,  as  "  Mordecai's 


no  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

day,"  and  is  said  by  Josephus  to  be  observed  by  Jews  in  all  the 
world. 

The  writer  of  the  book  is  not  Mordecai,  as  has  been  inferred 
from  9 :  20.  On  the  contrary  the  writer  is  unknown.  Proba- 
bly the  book  was  written  by  a  resident  of  Persia,  and  soon  after 
the  occurrence  of  the  events  described  therein. 

Mention  is  made,  10 :  2,  of  the  chronicles  of  the  kings  of 
Media  and  Persia ;  details  are  given,  language  and  close  of  the 
canon  referred  to. 

Objections  have  been  made  to  the  book  from  explanations 
given  of  1 :  1,  13  ;  8:8.  The  name  of  God  does  not  occur  in 
the  book,  though  there  is  a  mention  of  fasting  as  a  religious 
observance,  4 :  1-3,  16.  Allusion  is  made  to  providential 
deliverance  and  ordering  for  the  Jews  in  chap.  4  :  14.  Mor- 
decai's  refusal,  on  religious  grounds,  of  adoration  to  Haman,  as 
Grand  Vizier  (3 :  2),  shows  that  religion  was  known  and  pre- 
valent, although  the  name  of  God  is  not  mentioned.  There  are 
to  this  book  certain  apocryphal  sections. 


Book  of  the  Psalms. 


XXIX.     INDIVIDUAL   CHARACTER. 

Each  book  of  the  Prophets  represents  the  work  of  one 
inspired  servant  of  God.  But  the  Psalms  consist  of  150  dis- 
tinct compositions,  each  complete  in  itself,  varied  in  style  and 
subject,  and  proceeding  from  different  authors  of  different 
dates.  From  the  age  of  Moses  until  after  the  Babylonish  cap- 
tivity, these  Psalms  continued  to  be  written.  Still,  in  study- 
ing the  plan  of  the  0.  T.,  this  book,  like  all  the  rest,  must  be 
regarded  as  a  unit.  They  were  written  by  Moses,  David, 
Solomon,  Asaph,  Ethan,  Heman,  and  the  sons  of  Korah. 
Besides  those  of  known  authorship,  41  are  anonymous,  and  the 
time  of  production  unknown. 

Some  critics  hold  that  some  of  the  Psalms  belong  to  the 
period  of  the  Maccabees,  and  are  descriptive  of  the  trials  and 
triumphs  of  God's  people  at  that  time.  But  though  this 
position  is  untenable,  because  the  canon  was  closed  in  the  time 
of  Ezra,  still  some  were  written  during  and  after  the  Babylon- 
ish exile.  The  collection  was  carried  on  during  the  whole 
formation' of  the  canon.  This  book  must  be  studied  as  a  unit, 
because  : 

I.  The  form  and  compass  of  books  are  authoritative,  as  well 
as  their  contents. 

II.  It  is  impossible  to  determine  in  all  cases  the  age  and 
authorship.  The  correctness  of  the  titles,  once  called  in  ques- 
tion, is  now  conceded  by  the  best  critics.  Nearly  one-third 
either  have  no  titles,  or  none  aflfording  a  hint  as  to  the  author 
or  the  occasion  of  the  composition.  If  the  absentee  of  titles 
could  be  compensated  for  by  internal  proof  of  date,  we  might 


112  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

be  able  to  locate  them,  in  time  and  authorship,  and  so  clear  up 
the  difficulty.  But  the  wide  diflference  of  opinion  among  critics 
shows  that  it  is  impossible  to  ascertain  the  date.  These  inter- 
nal grounds  of  proof  are  meagre  except  in  a  very  few  cases. 
Such  an  identification  is  unnecessary  for  practical  purposes. 
Such  minor  questions  are  not  of  sufficient  importance  to  mar  the 
unity  of  their  plan  and  contents. 

III.  More  than  one-half  were  composed  by  David.  A  sub- 
stantial truth  is  conveyed  in  the  title  popularly  given  to  the 
whole  collection,  "  The  Psalms  of  David."  Those  written  by 
David  gave  the  key  note,  which  the  others  followed.  They 
wrote  in  his  vein  and  spirit,  and  yet  were  not  servile  imitators. 
A  general  sameness  of  style  justifies  us  in  calling  them  Davidic 
in  character.  A  later  date  than  David  is  known  only  by  a 
minute  criticism. 

To  this  uniform  Davidic  character  of  the  collection,  is  due 
the  frequent  absence  of  explanatory  titles.  The  absence  of  titles 
in  some  cases  proves  the  truth  of  titles  where  they  do  occur. 
If  they  were  fictitious  they  would  have  been  given  to  all. 

I.  The  absence  cannot  be  accounted  for  by  the  ignorance  of 
the  collectors.  The  oldest  have  titles  and  the  more  recent  have 
none.  If  this  fact  were  just  the  reverse,  then  it  might  be  possi- 
ble to  suppose  the  compiler  did  not  know  who  was  the  author, 
and  so  attached  no  title. 

II.  Some  post-Davidic  Psalms  have  no  titles,  though  their 
occasions  are  indicated  by  their  contents,  e.  g.,  Psalms  137,  83. 
In  137  we  read,  "  By  the  rivers  of  Babylon,  &c."  In  83  we 
read  that  the  occasion  was  the  confederation  of  the  Edomites, 
Ishmaelites,  &c.,  against  Israelites  in  time  of  Jehosaphat  (2 
Chron.  20),  to  cut  them  off  from  being  a  nation,  &c.  It  was 
possible  for  the  collectors  of  the  canon  to  have  given  the  theme 
of  the  Pslams  as  a  heading  or  title  if  they  had  chosen  so  to  do. 

III.  Analogy  of  other  books.  No  prophecy,  however  short, 
is  anonymous,  though  the  books  of  history  generally  are,  not 
from  ignorance  but  from  the  nature  of  the  writing.  Facts 
authenticate  history,  but  prophecy  calls  for  authority  and 
personel  of  the  prophet,  the  servant  of  God  who  delivers  it.    The 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  113 

names  of  the  Psalms  are  preserved  so   far  as  any  important 
end  was  to  be  subserved  thereby. 

IV.  With  the  exception  of  Ps.  90,  attributed  to  Moses,  the 
names  of  no  Psalmists  are  preserved  but  those  of  David  and  a^ 
series  connected  with  and  dependent  on  him,  viz. :  Solomon' 
and  the  Levitical  singers  appointed  by  David,  or  their  descend-- 
ants.  The  rest  introduce  no  new  element,  and  their  personality 
would  answer  no  practical  purpose,  and  so  is  omitted. 

V.  The  Psalms  of  different  writers  and  ages  are  not  kept 
distinct,  but  are  mingled  promiscuously  together,  except  in  a' 
general  way  referred  to  in  Ps.  72:  20,  "the  prayers  of  David/ 
the  son  of  Jesse,  are  ended." 

Of  the  seventy-two  Psalms  preceding  this,  sixty-two  are  by 
David.     Only  seventeen  of  the  seventy-eight  which  follow,  are' 
David's.     The  Psalms  of  David,  after  being  gathered  in  a  solid- 
nucleus  at  the  beginning  of  the  book,  are  scattered  through  the' 
book.     Hengstenberg  and  Dr.  Alexander  say  that  these  scat- 
tered Psalms  of  David  are  texts  or  centres  around  which  others- 
are  clustered.     They  refer  to  the  grouping  of  the  minor  pro- 
phets in   the  early  catalogues  of  the  canon,  as  an  analogous 
case.     These  minor  prophets  are  separate  books  and  are  chrono-- 
logically  arranged  with  reference  to  each  other,  yet  as  a  whole' 
they  are  regarded  and  treated  as  one  book.     If  there  had  been* 
a  similar  reason  for  the  chonological  arrangement  of  the  Psalms- 
they  would  have  appeared  so,  but  as  the  historical  element  is' 
not  predominant,  the  chronological  arrangement  is  not  followed.' 

The  function  of  the  Psalms  is  to  be  found  in  the  separate^' 
Psalms  themselves,  and  not  in  their  authors  or  dates. 

The  Psalms  are  not  a  heterogeneous  miscellany.     They  all' 
belong  to  the  same  species  of  composition.     They  are  not  only 
poetical,  lyrical,  inspired  and  canonic>)l,  but  are  also  for  public- 
and  devotional  use.     They  do  not  contain  all  the  lyrics  of  the^ 
ancient  Hebrews,  nor  all  their  extant  poetry.     For  instance, 
the  1005  Songs  of  Solomon,  the  Song  of  Moses  at  the  Red  Sea,- 
poetical  productions  of  Habakkuk,  Jonah,  Jeremiah,  David's 
lament  over  Saul,  and  many  others.     The  Psalms  are  inspired- 
songs /or  devotion,  being  used  in  the  temple  service. 

15 


114  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

1.  They  were  intended  to  guide  and  express  the  devotions  of 
all  God's  people  whether  in  public  or  in  private  worship. 

2.  They  are  not  merely  meditations,  confessions  and  prayers 
for  pardon  and  praise.  They  are  the  religion  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment practically  realized  in  the  heart  and  life.  They  abound 
in  thanksgiving  and  in  crying  out  to  God  for  deliverance  when 
in  affliction. 

I.  They  are  thus  negatively  distinguished  : 

1.  From  the  Prophets,  &c.,  with  whom  they  form  the  most 
marked  contrast.  While  the  Psalmist  speaks  to  God  in  his  own 
name  and  that  of  other  men,  the  Prophets  speak  to  men  from 
and  in  the  name  of  God.  The  function  of  a  Prophet  is  the 
objective  enlargement  of  revealed  truth  by  fresh  communica- 
tions ;  that  of  the  Psalmist,  the  subjective  appropriation  of 
truth  already  revealed,  and  thus  a  deeper  spiritual  realization 
is  had. 

The  Prophet  has  primary  reference  to  the  needs  of  others, 
mostly  to  national  necessities.  The  Psalmist  has  reference  to 
his  own  needs  and  those  of  the  class  to  which  he  belongs. 

2.  From  the  Aphoristic  poetry  of  the  Old  Testament.  There 
are  six  strictly  poetical  books  in  Old  Testament ;  three  lyrical, 
viz. :  Psalms,  The  Song  of  Solomon,  and  Lamentations.  Their 
contents  deal  with  the  domain  of  reflection,  satisfying  the 
reason  as  to  the  harmony  and  conformity  of  God's  law  with  his 
providence.  Of  the  other  three,  Proverbs  emphasize  the  fact 
that  human  welfare  is  found  as  a  general  truth  in  obedience  to 
the  will  of  God,  though  the  remaining  two  constitute  apparent 
exceptions.  For  in  Job  we  have  set  forth  piety  without  pros- 
perity, and  in  Ecclesiastes,  prosperity  without  piety. 

3.  From  other  lyrical  poetry  of  the  Old  Testament  which  is 
not  the  language  of  worship,  as  Song  of  Solomon.  Private  and 
individual  songs  or  supplications,  as  those  of  Hannah,  Jonah, 
Hezekiah,  and  such  as  are  intended  only  for  a  single  occasion, 
as  the  national  song  of  Moses,  are  not  grouped  as  Psalma, 
being  not  intended  for  public  and  permanent  devotions  of  the 
sanctuary. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  115 

II.  Positively,  the  unity  of  the  book  is  that  of  self-contained 
completeness,  embodying  the  religion  of  the  Old  Testament  as 
seen  in  the  sum  of  its  devotional  utterances. 


XXX.     SPECIAL   FUNCTION. 

I.  The  first  function  is  found  in  the  expansion  of  the  Mosaic 
law. 

1.  Their  use  constitutes  a  method  of  teaching  which  comes 
nearer  to  the  individual  man.  Various  methods  are  employed 
in  0.  T.  with  different  degrees  of  particularity  of  impressing 
truth.  History  speaks  of  remote  facts  once  transacted.  The 
ritual  was  constantly  repeated  in  public,  but  only  at  the  sanc- 
tuary. The  Psalms  were  not  only  associated  with  the  solemni- 
ties and  pomp  of  the  temple  service,  but  were  repeated  and 
sung  in  every  habitation.  The  Proverbs  are  more  brief  and 
pointed,  and  therefore  more  familiar  and  general  in  their  appli- 
cation. The  Prophets  communicated  specific  lessons  for  emer- 
gencies as  they  arose,  and  usually  for  the  entire  nation. 

2.  The  Psalms  are  a  medium  of  conveying  instruction  more 
clearly  to  the  understanding.  They  are  often  verbal  interpre- 
tations of  the  mute  lessons  of  history,  whether  past  or  present, 
national  or  individual.  They  often  enforce  a  spiritual  truth  by 
a  comparison  with  some  permanent  object  or  relation,  and  also 
with  transient  facts. 

The  Psalms  serve  in  some  measure  to  interpret  the  ritual 
symbols,  (1)  by  embodying  in  words  the  same  direct  acts  of 
worship,  and  for  this  reason  they  were  suitable  for  public  use 
in  the  worship  of  the  sanctuary.  (2)  By  using  language  often 
borrowed  from,  or  shaped  by,  the  ceremonial,  not  in  the  way  of 
general  exposition  as  the  Epistle  to  Hebrews,  but  for  instruc- 
tive allusion.  (3)  By  stimulating  reflection  and  inquiry  by 
partial  disclosures  of  the  meaning  of  the  symbolic  ritual. 

3.  There  is  an  expansion  of  the  law,  not  in  didactic  state- 
ments or  ritual  forms,  but  by  practically  realizing  religion  in 
the  heart  and  life. 


116  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

II.  In  addition  to  expanding  the  law,  the  Psalma  serve  to 
create  further  preparation  for  Christ's  coming.  The  positive 
accession  made  to  our  knowledge  of  the  Messiah  is  less  here 
than  in  the  Prophets.  This  results  from  the  different  aims  of 
the  books.  The  leading  aim  of  the  prophetical  books  is  to  set 
forth  prophecies  and  to  place  before  the  inner  consciousness  of 
God's  people  some  new  truths.  The  leading  aim  of  the  poetical 
books  is  not  so  much  to  make  new  disclosures  of  truth  as  to 
bring  home  truth  already  communicated,  explicitly  or  implicitly. 
But  new  elements  of  truth  are  not  wanting.  This  growth  of 
ideas  previously  imparted  is  not  the  same  as  a  logical  develop- 
ment of  ideas  or  principles  already  laid  down,  but  a  process  of 
unfolding  regularly  from  stage  to  stage.  There  is  an  increment 
as  well  as  an  evolution.  The  former  must  precede  the  latter. 
Tearing  open  a  bud  does  not  give  us  a  flower.  There  must  be 
a  constant  addition  of  substance  to  the  bud  as  it  gradually 
unfolds  under  the  operation  of  the  laws  of  growth.  In  Prophecy 
the  new  predominates,  in  the  Psalms  and  other  poets,  the  old  ; 
yet  each  occurs  in  both. 

Opinions  held  as  to  the  doctrine  of  Messiah  in  Psalms. 
There  are  three  opinions  : 

1.  That  there  is  no  explicit  reference  to  the  Messiah  in  the 
whole  collection. 

2.  Not  only  every  Psalm,  but  every  poetical  book  has  refer- 
ence to  the  Messiah. 

3.  Middle  ground  between  these  extremes. 

There  are  Messianic  references  only  in  particular  Psalms,  and 
these  do  not  form  a  distinct  class.  They  are  not  to  be  sun- 
dered from  the  rest.  Instead  of  being  reduced  to  the  level  of 
the  other  Psalms,  they  are  to  be  regarded  as  an  integral  part 
of  a  system  of  thought  and  feeling.  They  are  the  crowning 
point  of  a  pyramid  supported  by  all  beneath.  They  are  the 
foci  where  all  the  rays  meet  in  luminous  points  of  light.  The 
Messianic  teachings  of  the  Psalms  have  not  been  arbitrarily  or 
spasmodically  injected,  but  interwoven  as  radical  parts  of  the 
texture,  and  form  the  most  important  part  of  the  whole  book. 
The  entire  Old  Testament  is  preparatory  to   the   coming  of 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  117 

Christ,  and  all  revelatioa  tended  to  this  point.  Sudden 
glimpses  into  the  future  do  not  stand  apart  from  the  other 
teachings  of  the  Prophets,  and  so  it  is  also  easy  to  trace  currents 
of  thought  running  through  the  Psalms,  setting  toward  the 
Messianic  Psalms  and  culminatinc:  in  them,  thus  makingr  the 
whole  book  an  integral  part  in  the  one  continuous  scheme  of 
Messianic  preparation. 


XXXI.     MESSIANIC   CONTENTS   OF   THE 

PSALMS. 

The  Messianic  element  is  not  suddenly  injected  into  the  book 
of  Psalms,  but  is  interwoven  most  intimately  and  connectedly 
with  the  whole,  to  which  indeed  it  is  related  as  the  heart,  the 
seat  and  center  of  vitality.  Preparation  for  the  Messiah's 
coming  was  made  not  so  much  by  isolated  passages  as  by  the 
entire  teaching  of  the  0.  T.  This  is  true  alike  of  the  Psalms 
and  Prophetic  writings.  The  mode  of  each  Prophetic  presen- 
tation of  the  Messiah  is  shaped  by  the  character  of  the  entire 
book  in  which  it  occurs  ;  while  on  the  other  hand,  the  Prophetic 
writings  may  be  arranged  according  to  the  Christological  con- 
tents. The  whole  0.  T.  presents  one  continuous  scheme  of 
preparation  for  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  God. 

It  is  easy  to  trace  in  the  book  of  Psalms  currents  which  set 
and  issue  in  the  direction  of  the  Messianic  idea.  And  in  the 
0.  T.  we  find  a  completeness  in  this  scheme  of  thought  to  which 
each  Poetical  book  contributes  its  part.  The  Psalms  are  utter- 
ances of  worship  where  distracting  thoughts  are  excluded.  God 
and  man  are  brought  face  to  face.  We  have  two  domains 
presented — man's  relations  to  God  and  God's  relation  to  man. 
These  are  distinct  but  correlative. 

Man  may  be  regarded  : 

(1)  Passively  in  his  privileges,  as  a  creature  endowed  of 
God.    Or, 

(2)  Actively  in  his  duties  as  a  servant  of  God,  the  subject  of 
His  law.     In  this  latter  aspect  he  may  be  viewed  either  as  in 


118  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

the  heat  of  conflict  or  a.s  in  the  position  of  a  conqueror  of  evil. 
The  triple  correlates  in  the  sphere  of  God's  relation  to  man 
may  be  thus  tabulated  : 

I.    (a)  Man  the  creature  endowed  of  God. 

(b)  God  the  creator  and  benefactor  of  man. 
II.    (a)  The  righteous  beset  by  foes. 

ib)  God  his  deliverer. 
III.    (a)  The  righteous  victorious  by  God's  delivering  aid. 

(6)  Man  without  God  failing,  though  possessed  of  every  earthly  advantage. 

Those  six  ideas  are  the  foundations  of  the  Messianic  teach- 
ings. These  and  these  only  culminate  positively  or  negatively 
in  the  poetical  books  in  the  Messianic  idea.  The  Messiah  is 
approached  both  from  the  divine  and  human  side.  Those 
Psalms  which  approach  from  the  divine  side  are  less  consciously 
Messianic ;  and  though  they  contain  Messianic  ideas,  it  is  not 
clear  that  the  writer  so  intended  them.  Let  us  see  how  these 
remarks  are  borne  out  by  a  consideration  of  particular  Psalms. 

1.  (a)  Man  lifted  into  the  Messianic  sphere  by  super-human 
endowments.  When  limits  are  lost  sight  of  and  the  divine 
bounty  takes  its  dimensions  only  from  the  power  of  God  to  give, 
the  subject  rises  above  the  sphere  of  ordinary  men  and  can 
apply  only  to  the  Messiah.  Thus  Psalms  8,  at  least  trembles 
on  the  verge  of  the  Messianic  idea  and  is  certainly  developed 
into  full  Messianic  dimensions  by  Paul.  The  Psalms  which  are 
predominantly  practical  approach  most  naturally  from  the 
human  side;  other  poetical  books  which  are  more  speculative, 
from  the  divine  side. 

(6)  But  the  thought  of  God  relative  to  His  creatures  comes 
within  the  range  of  what  belongs  to  God's  Son.  Ps.  102,  Ps. 
97,  are  quoted  in  Hebrews  in  application  to  Christ.  This  is 
done  not  merely  by  accommodation  but  Christ's  claims  are 
argued  from  them.  Jehovah  coming  into  relation  to  man  in 
0.  T.  is  the  Son  of  God.  So  are  the  Angel  and  the  Word  of 
Jehovah  which  we  find  more  developed  in  the  wisdom  of  God 
(Prov.  8) — regarded  by  many  able  commentators  as  a  distinct 
person,  viz. :  Christ. 

II.  (a)  The  righteous  beset  by  foes  with  attributes  or  results 
transcending  the  human,  shaped  largely  by  the  typical  experi- 
ence of  David  himself.     In  Ps.  22,  which  Strauss  pronounced 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  119 

the  programme  of  the  crucifixion,  the  removal  of  limitations  is 
absolute.  It  is  partial  in  Pa.  16,  declared  by  Peter  to  be  ful- 
filled only  in  the  Resurrection  of  Christ ;  in  Ps.  40,  from  which 
Hebrews  develops  the  inherent  merit  of  Christ's  sacrifice ;  in  Pa. 
69,  Ps.  109,  which  likewise  mediate  between  the  merely  human 
and  the  exclusively  Messianic.  Those  which  represent  the 
Messiah  as  a  sufferer,  exhibit  His  priesthood,  and,  in  connection 
with  it.  His  prophetic  office.  His  extreme  sufferings  issue  in 
the  salvation  of  the  world,  Ps.  22,  but  are  not  explicitly  said  to 
be  vicarious  ;  and  it  is  obedience  rather  than  substitution  which 
is  predicted  of  Him,  (compare  Ps.  22 :  22  with  Ps.  40 :  7).  Tho 
vicarious  character  of  His  sufferings  is  reserved  for  Is.  53. 

(6)  Correlative  to  a  suffering  righteous  one  is  a  delivering 
God.  Job,  as  a  sufferer,  was  a  distinguished  type  of  the  Mes- 
siah ;  but  the  outburst  of  his  faith,  (Job  i'J),  though  not  perhaps 
consciously  directed  to  Christ,  has  been  in  all  ages  applied  to 
Him  as  the  true  Redeemer  by  the  church. 

III.  The  struggle  between  the  serpent  and  the  seed  of  the 
woman  was  to  reach  its  acme  in  Christ,  whose  contest,  though 
different  in  manner  and  result  from  that  of  the  ordinary 
descendants  of  Adam,  would  be  similar  in  kind.  The  serpent 
was  to  bruise  His  heel ;  the  strife  would  not  terminate  in  this, 
but  in  the  full  triumph  of  the  seed  of  the  woman.  Thus,  in  the 
Psalms,  we  meet  with  : 

(a)  The  triumphant  righteous.  David  and  Solomon,  from 
personal  experience  and  official  position,  are  eminent  types  of 
Christ  in  this  respect.  They  were  the  divinely  appointed  heads 
of  the  kingdom  while  at  the  zenith  of  its  prosperity,  temporal 
and  spiritual.  The  conflict  with  evil  carried  on  by  God's  help 
issued  in  success.  Thus,  in  Ps.  2,  the  Lord's  Anointed  is  repre- 
sented as  triumphant  over  the  combined  hosts  of  his  enemies. 
Ps.  72  pictures  the  peace  of  Messiah's  reign  in  the  tranquility 
of  Solomon's;  and  as  the  submission  rendered  to  Him  is  volun- 
tary and  loyal,  it  is  represented  in  Ps.  45  and  in  Solomon's 
Song  under  the  figure  of  a  marriage.  In  Ps.  110  new  dignity 
is  added  to  the  monarch  who  is  set  forth  not  only  as  a  trium- 
phant king  but  as  a  priest  like  Melchizedek,  one  with  unre- 


120  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

stricted  sacerdotal  privileges,  of  near  approach  to  God,  one  who 
has  a  permanent  seat  at  God's  right  hand  and  is  a  priest 
forever. 

{b)  Again  the  kingdom  may  be  viewed  as  worldly  and  tran- 
sitory, and  used  not  as  a  comparison  with  but  as  a  contrast  to 
Messiah's  kingdom.  This  is  the  method  followed  in  Ecclesi- 
astes  and  Lamentations,  which  represent  the  kingdom  as 
unsatisfactory  amid  all  its  splendor  and  as  tending  to  ruin. 

To  sum  up,  we  have  in  the  Psalms  a  man  raised  far  above  the 
rank  of  humanity ;  a  Righteous  Sufferer  who  brings  salvation  to 
the  world;  a  Triumphant  Monarch  ruling  over  all,  wedded  to  His 
people  in  holy  love  and  related  to  them  as  Priest  as  well  as 
King.  He  is  the  same  as  the  Wisdom  of  God  in  Proverbs  ;  the 
Redeemer  in  Job  and  the  Founder  of  that  empire  which  is  not 
unsatisfactory  and  transient  like  that  depicted  in  Ecclesiastea 
and  Lamentations. 


Song  of  Solomon. 


Song  of  Solomon  is  very  attractive  even  from  a  literary  point 
of  view ;  its  naturalness,  delicacy  of  portrayal,  lend  to  it  a 
charm.  Many  judges  call  it  a  very  gem  of  art.  It  has  all  the 
attractions  of  an  unsolved  mystery.  It  is  one  of  ihe  great 
puzzles  of  the  Bible.     Every  thing  about  it  has  been  disputed. 

I.  As  to  its  unity  :  Is  it  a  number  of  independent  sonnets, 
by  one  author,  on  one  theme?  Or  is  it  a  mere  congeries  of 
different  songs  ? 

II.  As  to  kind  of  poetry  :  Epithalamiun,  Epic,  Bucolic,  or 
Drama,  divisible  in  acts  and  scenes,  or  a  partial  drama  ? 

III.  As  to  its  author  :  Is  it  of  one  or  many  ?  In  same  or 
different  ages  ?  Is  Solomon  its  author,  or  is  he  excluded  by  the 
contents  ? 

IV.  As  to  its  contents  :  Is  it  the  loving  language  of  Solomon 
to  his  bride,  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh,  or  some  rustic  beauty  ? 
Or  is  the  lover  another  from  whom  Solomon  steals  his  love  ? 
Are  the  persons  speaking  few  or  many  ? 

V.  Is  the  interpretation  to  be  literal  ?  Is  it  unworthy  of  the 
canon?     Is  it  prophetic? 

Outward  Form. — Before  plunging  into  the  whirlpool  of 
interpretation  or  discussions  as  to  date,  or  authorship,  let  us 
seek  to  comprehend  the  book  as  to  its  outward  form,  and  most 
literal  and  obvious  sense. 

UNITY. 

Opinion  of  Bossuet  (died  1704) ;  he  thought  it  an  Epithala- 
mium  in  honor  of  Solomon's  wedding  with  Pharaoh's  daughter, 

16 


122  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

composed  in  seven  parts  for  seven  days  of  his  wedding  feast 
(Gen.  29  :  27  ;  Judges  14  :  12).     His  proofs  are  : 

1.  The  personages  suggest  a  wedding. 

a.  Solomon  and  his  bride  are  the  chief  speakers,  h.  The 
bride's  companions  who  speak  to  her,  and  to  whom  the  bride- 
groom speaks  (Ps.  45  :  14  ;  Mt.  45  :  1).  c.  Male  companions 
of  the  groom  who  say  nothing  (5:1;  8  :  13) ;  (Judges  14  :  11 ; 
Mt.  9  :  15). 

2.  There  are  certain  expressions  in  song  which  imply  a 
change  of  day  and  night.  The  bride  is  supposed  to  have  been 
brought  to  his  chamber  the  evening  of  the  first  day.  The 
groom  goes  out  as  a  shepherd  at  dawn  to  his  work.  Soon  the 
bride  awakes  and  breaks  out  in  longing  lore.  Here  the  song 
begins.  So  every  day  he  goes  out  at  dawn  and  tells  her  com- 
panions not  to  awake  her  (2:7:  8 ;  4).  Each  of  these  verses 
marks  the  beginning  of  a  new  day.  So  the  formula,  "  Who  is 
this  ?"  marks  the  beginning  of  a  day  and  the  greetings  of  her 
friends  to  the  bride  as  she  leaves  her  room.  Mention  is  twice 
(3:1;  5:2)  made  of  the  night ;  and  twice  (2:6;  8  :  3)  of  the 
bride  in  the  husband's  arms. 

First  day — chap.  1-2  :  6  ;  second  day,  2  :  7-2  :  17  ;  third 
day,  3-5:1;  fourth  day,  5:2-6:9;  fifth  day,  6  :  10-7  :  11 ; 
sixth  day,  7  :  12-8 :  3  ;  seventh  day,  8  :  4-8  :  14. 

This  view  of  Bossuet  was  at  first  well  received. 

Objections. — (1)  It  is  against  Oriental  ideas  and  usages  ; 
music  and  song  accompanied  marriage  feasts,  but  the  bride  was 
always  veiled  and  silent. 

(2)  Recurring  formulas  do  not  indicate  the  morn  of  a  fresh 
day.  The  utmost  that  can  be  claimed  is  their  consistency  with 
a  succession  of  days,  which  must  be  otherwise  proved.  They 
mark  the  close  and  beginning  of  new  scenes  in  the  Song. 

(3)  One,  at  least,  of  Bossuet's  divisions  is  not  justified  by  the 
form.  The  eleventh  and  twelfth  verses  of  the  seventh  chapter 
are  in  one  connected  speech  of  the  bride,  and  do  not  justify 
separation. 

(4)  The  whole  character  of  the  Song  does  not  suggest  a  suc- 
cession of  the  days.     That  the  bridegroom  should  go  out  every 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  123 

day,  supposes  very  pressing  business.  The  parties  are  repre- 
sented as  meeting  and  speaking  in  the  open  air  and  not  at  a 
banquet. 

THE   IDYLLIC   THEORY. 

Herder's  view,  (1778): 

He  ranks  these  songs  above  all  other  idyls.  According  to 
Herder,  the  book  contains  sonnets  of  Solomon  on  love,  portray- 
ing different  people  and  various  scenes,  as  Eclogues  of  Virgil. 
We  are  told  in  Kings  that  Solomon's  songs  were  one  thousand 
and  five ;  and  of  these  he  supposes  we  have  a  few  in  canticles. 

In  ihe  first  sonnet  (1:2-1:4)  a  King  is  portrayed  who  is  loved 
by  many,  without  jealousy. 

In  the  second  (1:5-1:8)  there  is  a  country  lass  and  shepherd 
lover. 

In  the  third  (1:9-1:14)  another  change — he  speaks  of  the 
pride  and  splendor  of  the  royal  bride — addressed  by  him  who 
praises  her  and  promises  ornaments. 

In  the  fourth  (1:15-2:7)  a  loving  pair  on  the  green  turf, 
under  an  apple  tree — she  sinks  into  his  arms  and  he  sings  a 
soft  lullaby. 

In  the  fifth  (2:8-2:14)  the  situation  changes.  The  lover  long 
absent,  the  fair  one  like  a  dove  is  in  the  clefts  of  the  rock.  His 
visit  is  the  first  spring  visit  of  love. 

In  the  sixth  (2:15)  a  chasing  song,  which  has  no  connection 
with  the  preceding  or  the  following. 

In  the  seventh  (2:16-2:17)  the  lover  is  at  his  occupation  but 
will  come  again. 

In  the  eighth  (3:1-3:5)  is  a  night  song.  A  maiden  seeks  her 
lover  in  her  dreams  but  finds  him  not.  On  waking,  she  rises 
and  wanders  through  the  city,  and  brings  him  to  her  mother's 
house.  The  collector  inserts  the  usual  lullaby.  Other  night 
pieces  follow. 

In  the  ninth  (3 :  6)  we  have  a  fragment  with  the  customary 
formula.  A  maiden  in  the  twilight,  tall  and  slender,  her  form 
in  the  dark  is  like  pillars  of  smoke. 


124  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

The  tenth  (3  :  7-3  :  11)  begins  with  the  fear  in  the  night  and 
three  strangers  follow  :  the  first,  celebrating  the  martial  force  of 
Solomon ;  the  second,  his  bed  of  love ;  the  third,  his  wedding 
crown  and  his  joy  of  heart  on  occasion  of  his  nuptials. 

The  eleventh  (4 :  1-5 :  1)  describes  the  mutual  love  of  those 
betrothed.  He  praises  her  beauty  until  at  mention  of  her 
breasts,  the  bride  checks  him  by  a  change  of  scene.  He  arouses 
her  modesty  and,  by  figures,  says  how  she  has  emboldened  him 
to  go  with  her  anywhere,  and  calls  on  the  winds  to  blow  on  the 
garden  of  her  beauty.  She  interrupts  him  again,  and  inter- 
preting his  language  literally  asks  him  to  come  into  his  garden 
and  eat  his  pleasant  fruits. 

The  twelfth  sonnet  (5 :  2-6 :  9)  is  another  night  scene,  but 
with  no  reference  to  what  precedes.  It  is  not  a  royal,  but  a 
country  girl  sleeping  alone  in  her  cottage.  Her  lover  knocks, 
and  trys  to  open  the  door.  She  delays  in  dressing,  then  seeks 
him  as  he  has  turned  and  gone.  She  meets  the  daughters  of 
Jerusalem,  and  praises  him,  not  so  much  for  his  personal  charms, 
as  for  his  dress.  It  is  probable  two  different  pieces  have  been 
put  together  by  the  collector. 

The  thirteenth  sonnet  (6 :  10-8 :  4)  is  the  crown  of  the  song. 
New  scenes  with  the  usual  formula.  The  bride  appears  not  as 
dimly  seen,  but  as  the  morning,  as  the  moon,  as  the  sun,  as  an 
army  with  banners,  singing  a  shepherd  song  in  memory  of  her 
former  country  simplicity.  It  then  changes  to  a  dance  like  that 
of  angels,  two  choirs.  Then  follows  a  description  of  an  elegant 
form  in  the  dance. 

The  fourteenth  sonnet  (8 :  5-8 :  7).  The  bride  appears  as 
walking  on  the  arm  of  her  husband.  The  converse  is  of  wedded 
fidelity.  By  the  old  trysting  tree  they  pledge  love.  The  seal 
of  love  here  is  the  seal  of  love  to  the  whole  book.  The  book 
would  well  end  here. 

The  fifteenth  sonnet  (8  :  8-8  :  12)  is  a  haughty  talk  of  a  sister 
with  her  brothers.  They  are  consulting  about  the  care  of  her 
purity.  If  she  is  a  wall  they  will  adorn  her  with  turrets  of 
silver,  &c.  She  says  her  person  inspires  respect,  and  she  scorn- 
fully relates  a  little  story  to  show  what  comes  of  guarding  her- 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  12.5 

self.     Solomon  lets  out  his  vineyard  to  keepers ;  she  keeps  her 
own  vineyard. 

The  sixteenth  sonnet  (8 :  13-8 :  14),  a  fragment  of  a  conver- 
sation between  a  young  lover  and  his  fair  one,  who  will  not  let 
him  flee. 

Herder,  however,  does  not  throw  the  sixteenth  altogether  as 
unconnected,  but  they  are  united  (1)  in  authorship,  all  are 
by  Solomon  and  are  models  ;  (2)  the  collector  of  these  forms 
of  Solomon  has  also  woven  a  unity  through  the  whole  by 
tracing  love  from  its  beginning  to  its  growths  to  ripened  fruits. 
The  sonnets  are  so  arranged  as  to  amount  to  six  scenes  and  an 
appendix.  The  first  scene  begins  at  the  first  verse  with  a 
desire  for  a  kiss.  The  love  is  not  exclusive,  but  shared  by 
others.     The  loved  is  at  a  distance. 

In  the  second  sonnet,  a  higher  certainty  of  reciprocated  love  ; 
but  now  there  is  envy  on  the  part  of  the  daughters  of  Jerusa- 
lem.    Her  fault  is  her  poverty,  and  she  seeks  her  one  friend. 

In  the  third  sonnet,  love^  shows  itself  in  presents,  so  far 
advanced  is  it.  He  sees  himself  in  the  ornaments  ;  she,  him 
in  the  nosegay. 

In  the /owri^  sonnet  there  follows  the  fond  rivalry  of  love, 
the  first  moment  of  expressed  love,  and  the  first  scene  closes. 

The  second  scene  begins  with  a  beautiful  spring  morning. 
The  lover  comes  but  gives  only  a  morning  greeting,  and  each 
goes  to  his  work.  We  have  the  fox  song  and  the  song  of  long- 
ing.    She  seeks  him  and  finds  him. 

The  third  scene  comprises  three  sonnets.  Who  is  this  fair 
one  in  the  dusky  twilight  ?  Then  he  sings  of  the  glories  of  the 
king's  bed,  then  of  the  wedding  crown,  and  the  glad  day  of  his 
espousals. 

The  fourth  scene  (5  :  2-6  :  9).  He  comes  to  seek  his  love. 
Before  she  opens  to  him,  he  is  gone.  She  seeks  him.  She  is 
sure  of  his  love,  and  is  rewarded  by  a  laudatory  song. 

The  fifth  scene  comprises  one  sonnet,  introducing  beauty  and 
pleasure  and  love. 

In  the  sixth  scene  we  have  the  sealing  of  early  vows.  Here 
the  book  properly  ends. 


126  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

In  the  appendix,  there  is  a  renewal  of  the  idea  in  their  off- 
spring ;  the  daughter  plays  the  part  her  mother  played. 

So  then  according  to  Herder,  we  have  a  number  of  distinct 
pieces  by  one  author,  so  united  by  the  collector  as  to  give  one 
progressive  theme. 

This  view  has  been  widely  adopted,  was  introduced  into 
England  by  Good,  in  1803.  He  gives  two  versions  of  the  song; 
first,  an  exact  rendering  and  the  other  a  metrical  translation. 
He  modifies  Herder's  view,  insisting  that  the  sonnets  concern 
the  same  parties  throughout.  The  bride  is  not  Pharaoh's 
daughter ;  that  marriage  was  one  of  state  policy. 

Good  finds  the  bride  of  this  song  to  be  another. 

In  2 :  1,  Sharon  is  her  birth-place;  7:  1,  shows  she  is  of 
noble  rank ;  8 :  11-12,  that  she  had  a  noble  marriage  portion 
at  Baal-hamon  ;  3  :  4,  shows  her  father's  probable  death  ;  8  :  5, 
that  her  mother  betrothed  her ;  1 :  6,  her  mother  was  twice 
married ;  8  :  1,  had  an  own  brother ;  8  :  8,  had  an  own  sister. 

Good  finds  twelve  sonnets. 

Prof.  Noyes,  of  Cambridge,  divides  it  into  twelve,  though  he 
agrees  with  Herder  as  to  there  being  different  parties  involved. 
This  idyl  theory  is  held  by  different  kinds  of  people ;  some 
thinking  it  a  mere  amatory  poem,  others  finding  in  it  an  alle- 
gory. 

A  fragmentary  hypothesis  has  also  been  held  in  regard  to  it, 
that  it  is  the  work  of  different  writers  in  different  ages.  Mag- 
nus of  Breslau,  1842,  held  such  a  theory.  According  to  him 
there  are  fourteen  complete  sonnets  and  eight  fragments,  which, 
however,  together  make  three  complete  sonnets.  Thus  the  two 
instances  of  search  by  night  are  really  one  sonnet.  Besides 
these  eight  fragments  there  is  one  fragment,  2 :  15,  which  he 
cannot  account  for.  Then  there  are  two  supplements  to  two  of 
these  sonnets  by  later  authors.  Thus  the  description  in  4  :  1-7 
is  supplementary  to  1  :  15.  Counting  these  it  makes  twenty 
different  pieces  of  composition.  Of  these,  eight  are  written 
about  fifty  years  after  Solomon,  six  in  the  age  of  Jeremiah, 
four  in  the  age  of  Ezekiel — two  he  does  not  account  for.  His 
conclusions  are  so  absurd  as  to  need  no  refutation. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  127 

CONSIDERATIONS    WHICH    TEND    TO    ESTABl^ISH    THE     UNITY    OF 

THE    BOOK. 

I.  Title — "  Song  of  Songs,  which  is  Solomon's."  "  Song  of 
songs  "  is  a  Hebraic  superlative,  and  is  equivalent  to  "  most 
excellent  of  Solomon's  songs." 

This  argument  is  evaded  by  : 

(1)  By  forced  construction,  as  though  it  meant  a  song  com- 
posed of  songs  ;  or  by  giving  a  distinct  meaning  to  the  first  noun 
from  Chaldee  and  Arabic  analogies,  as  "  a  chain  or  series  of 
songs ;"  but  this  is  against  Hebrew  usage. 

(2)  By  denying  its  genuineness,  (a)  Because  it  refers  com- 
position to  Solomon,  which  is  impossible.  (6)  Because  in  the 
title  a'sher  is  used,  and  in  the  body  of  the  discourse  she,  it  is 
argued  that  the  title  is  not  genuine.  But  the  title  is  prose,  and 
the  book  poetry.  That  there  should  be  no  title,  or  that  the  title 
should  be  changed,  is  an  improbable  supposition.  Whoever 
put  the  title  there,  wished  to  give  his  testimony  that  the  work 
•was  by  Solomon.  If  the  title  proceeded  from  the  collectors  of 
the  canon,  they  must  have  had  good  reason. 

II.  The  actors  and  speakers  in  the  song  are  the  same 
throughout. 

III.  Eepetition  of  same  verse  in  different  parts  to  mark  the 
beginning  and  end  of  sections. 

IV.  The  recurrence  of  similar  'expressions. 

V.  The  diction  is  peculiar,  being  like  that  of  no  other  0.  T. 
book.  The  abbreviated  relative  (she)  only  occasionally  occur- 
ring in  other  books,  uniformly  occurs  in  this  book.  Opher 
occurs  only  in  this  book  ;  but  here  five  times.  Other  illustra- 
tions might  be  given. 

VI.  Similarity  of  long  passages. 

VII.  Great  abundance  of  figures  from  nature  :  Lebanon  used 
five  times,  apple  four  times,  myrtle  seven  times. 

An  argument  from  style  is  more  easily  felt  than  stated. 
Many  attempts  have  been  made  to  find  the  internal  unity  of 
the  matter.  This  was  the  aim  of  the  dramatic  hypothesis  ably 
defended  by  Ewald  (1825-1867).  He  was  not  the  originator  of 
this  theory.     It  was  not  intended  for  the  stage,  but  has  all  the 


128  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

essentials  of  a  dramatic  composition.  There  is  a  story  not 
narrated,  but  progressively  unfolded.  He  maintains  that  the 
theme  is  not  merely  love  in  general,  but  the  charming  deline- 
ations of  love  are  subordinated  to  a  high  ethical  aim.  The 
theme  is  the  praise  of  innocence  resisting  all  enticements.  A 
Shulamite,  brought  up  at  Bngedi,  is  the  subject.  As  this 
woman  was  walking  with  her  lover,  she  is  surrounded  with 
chariots  of  a  royal  party.  The  king  takes  her  to  his  palace, 
flatters  her,  seeks  to  turn  her  aside  from  virtue.  She  repels 
him,  triumphing  over  all  his  arts  like  an  impregnable  wall. 
She  keeps  her  own  vineyard.    He  sends  her  home. 

He  divides  the  whole  into  four  acts,  separated  by  the  adjura- 
tion to  the  daughters  of  Jerusalem. 

I.  1:2-2:  7.  II.  2:8-3:  5.  III.  3:6-8:  4.  IV.  8 :  5- 
8:  14. 

The  dramatic  form  is  not  rigorously  adhered  to.  The 
speaker  weaves  in  the  speeches  of  others. 

Ewald,  in  a  later  view,  regards  it  as  intended  for  actual  rep- 
resentation on  the  stage,  dividing  the  third  act  into  two.  He 
thinks  it  is  an  opera  and  thirteen  scenes  or  songs.  Two  of 
them  to  each  of  the  first  two  acts,  four  to  the  third,  four  to  the 
fourth  and  one  to  the  fifth.     Each  act  is  a  successive  day. 

Act  I,  Scene  1,  (L:  2-1  :  8).  The  Shulamite  in  Solomon's 
palace.  She  has  observed  the  luxury,  her  heart  is  far  away. 
She  addresses  her  lover,  1:2,"  Thy  love  is  better  than  wine." 
Her  longing  increases  and  she  says,  "  draw  me  after  thee." 
The  ladies  of  the  court  wonder.  She  thinks  they  are  looking 
on  her  brown  face  with  contempt.  She  justifies  her  appearance 
which  she  thinks  still  is  beautiful.  She  imagines  him  feeding 
his  flocks.  The  court  ladies  are  amazed,  and  in  verse  8  reply 
sarcastically,  though  confessing  her  beauty. 

Scene  2,  (1 :  9-2 :  7).  Solomon  enters,  addresses  the  Shula- 
mite. Each  speaks  three  times.  The  Shulamite  repels  him  in 
figurative  language.  She  refers  to  her  absent  lover.  He  is  as 
a  bundle  of  myrrh  to  her.  The  king  again  praises  her  beauty. 
She  applies  his  words  to  her  absent  lover,  and  describes  the 
spot  in  which  she  had  enjoyed  his  society  in  the  green  wood. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  129 

At  length,  wearied,  she  falls  into  a  swoon,  and  imagines  her 
lover  by  her  side. 

Act  II,  (alone  with  the  ladies  of  the  court,  thoughts  still  with 
her  absent  lover).  Scene  1,  He  is  conceived  of  as  near  and 
about  to  take  her  away.  She  recalls  how  he  came  to  her  house, 
called  her  forth,  called  her  his  dove.  Her  present  inaccessibil- 
ity to  her  lover  blends  itself  with  memories  of  the  past.  She 
recalls  the  ecene  at  her  mother's  house.  She  wishes  that  her 
lover  would  hasten  to  her  over  the  mountains. 

Scene  2,  (3 :  1-3  :  5).  Her  dreams,  also,  are  of  her  absent 
lover.  She  tells  her  dreams.  She  arises  to  find  him.  The 
watchman  takes  her  home.     Here  she  swoons  again. 

Act  III  (3  :  6-5  :  8),  Scene  1.  In  front  of  gate  at  Jerusalem, 
a  splendid  procession  is  coming.  She  has  been  raised  to  rank 
of  Queen  consort.  Their  approach  is  vividly  depicted  by  the 
language  of  the  spectators.  All  have  seen  the  highest  honor 
heaped  upon  the  Shulamite. 

Scene  2.  King  renews  his  suit,  addressing  her  in  picturesque 
language. 

Scene  3.  Shulamite  alone.  Temptation  is  now  at  its  height. 
Her  thoughts  are  still  with  her  absent  lover.  If  she  were  on 
Lebanon.  She  calls  her  spouse  to  come  from  Hermon.  In  her 
dreamy  state,  she  is  unable  to  restrain  herself  and  calls  for  the 
north  wind  to  blow  on  her  garden  (i.  c,  herself).  She  hears 
his  response,  "  I  am  come  into  my  garden."  This  imaginary 
conversation  breaks  ofi"  with  a  swoon. 

Scene  4.  She  relates  a  fresh  dream  similar  to  the  preceding, 
but  with  sadder  termination. 

Act  IV  (5  :  9-8  :  4),  Scene  1.  The  court  ladies  begin  to  sym- 
pathize with  her.  They  ask  as  to  her  lover,  and  she  minutely 
describes  him. 

Scene  2.  King  enters.  Only  one  resource  left :  the  witchery 
of  words.  His  flatteries  surpass  all  that  has  gone  before. 
Her  power  over  him,  he  describes,  is  like  an  army  with  ban- 
ners. The  women  of  his  royal  court,  he  says,  are  inferior 
to  her. 

Scene  3.  After  a  pause,  he  renews  his  praises.     He  particu- 

17 


130  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

larizes  portions  of  the  body,  neck  and  head.  He  becomes  more 
urgent  and  desires  her  love. 

Scene  4.  Her  heart  is  with  her  lover.  "  I  am  my  beloved's," 
and  addresses  him  absent.  Remembering  her  present  position, 
she  alludes  to  her  own  home.  She  wishes  he  was  her  brother, 
whom  she  might  meet  and  kiss  as  though  she  were  at  home 
with  him.     She  again  swoons. 

Act  V  (8:5;  8:  14),  Scene  1.  An  entirely  different  state 
of  things.  Solomon  will  not  employ  force.  Permits  her  to 
return.  The  scene  opens  with  the  language  of  the  rustics  in 
the  region  of  her  home.  Restored  to  her  lover  she  is  merry 
and  joyous.  She  says  "  set  me  as  a  seal  upon  thine  heart." 
She  jestingly  refers  to  the  way  in  which  Solomon's  proposition 
was  managed  seeking  to  gain  her  love  by  money.  She  alludes 
to  the  language  of  her  brothers  before  she  was  grown.  But 
she  had  found  favor  in  his  eyes.  In  verse  13,  the  shepherd 
lover  speaks  for  the  first  time.  His  "gardens"  are  opposed  to 
the  palace  of  Solomon.  The  song  which  she  sings  is  to  her 
lover. 

Ewald's  theory — several  things  may  be  said  in  commenda- 
tion : 

I.  Great  ingenuity  is  shown  in  producing  a  captivating  story 
and  exciting  play.  The  utmost  skill  is  shown  in  weaving 
together  all  the  parts  of  the  song. 

II.  It  shows  the  unity  of  the  song. 

III.  It  is  not  improbable  from  what  we  know  of  Solomon  and 
his  times  that  such  an  event  might  easily  have  occurred. 

IV.  The  song  is  made  to  yield  an  acceptable  sense ;  a  definite 
moral  end  is  reached,  the  commendation  of  virtue  is  the  object. 
She  cleaves  to  the  lowly  and  true  shepherd. 

Objections :  (1)  Its  novelty  ;  it  gives  a  meaning  which  none 
of  its  readers  have  ever  seen  in  it.  An  hypothesis  in  contra- 
diction to  all  antiquity  should  prove  itself.  The  title  is  incon- 
sistent with  this  view.  Ewald  himself  says  that  the  Lamedh 
indicates  an  author.  The  reception  of  the  book  in  the  Jewish 
canon  implies  an  understanding  of  it  differing  from  this.  Ewald 
says  it  was  written  in  the  revolted  kingdom  and  breathes  hos- 


OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  131 

tility  to  Judea  and  Solomon.  There  is  no  hint  of  this  interpre- 
tation by  any  ancient  writer.  It  was  broached  first  by  Jacobi 
in  1751.  We  are  required  to  suppose  that  the  true  sense  was 
lost  very  early. 

(2)  The  whole   hypothesis  rests  on  slender  and   precarious 
foundation. 

(3)  The  hypothesis   requires  a  great  number  of  gratuitous 
assumptions.     Many  forced  interpretations  are  necessary. 

(4)  The  hypothesis  has  not  satisfied  subsequent  interpreters 
and  has  been  variously  modified. 

(5)  The  advocates  of  this  idea  subject  the  whole  song  to  much 
arbitrary  treatment. 

ALLEGORICAL   HYPOTHESIS. 

I.  It  contains  a  spiritual  truth  : 

(1)  The  bridegroom  is  addressed  as  such,  and  again  as  a 

simple  swain.  The  bride  once  as  a  prince's  daughter, 
and  again  as  a  keeper  of  a  vineyard. 

(2)  The  literal  sense  burdens  it  with  indecorous  incongruities. 

(3)  Many  parts  indicate  that  the  bride  is  not  an  individual 

person,  and  the  same  thing  is  shown  by  similes  inap- 
propriate to  set  forth  the  charms  of  a  beautiful  woman. 

II.  That  the  love  of  Christ  to  his  people  is  meant  is  estab- 
lished : 

(1)  By  the  position  of  the  book.     Those  who  received  it  into 

the  canon  must  have  conceded  its  spirituality. 

(2)  The  title:    what  distinguishes  it  is  the  loftiness  of  its 

subject. 

(3)  The  figure  of  a  marriage  is  frequently  used  in  the  Bible 

to  show  the  relation  of  Christ  to  his  people.  The  argu- 
ment is  two-fold. 

(a)  As  it  is  a  common  metaphor  it  is  probable  that  it  is  used 
here. 

(&)  The  more  frequent  use 'of  this  figure  in  later  times  seems 
due  to  the  influence  of  this  song. 

(4)  In  Ps.  45  a  similar  figure  is  used. 

(5)  Names  of  persons  are  suggestive  of  spiritual  meaning. 

Some  say  that  Shulamite  is  the  feminine  of  Solomon. 


132  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

(6)  Eev.  3  :  20  is  supposed  to  refer  to  Solomon.     Eph.  5 :  27 

may  refer  to  the  song.     In  Mt.  22:  2-14,  25:  1-13, 
Christ  explicitly  calls  himself  the  bridegroom. 

(7)  Spiritual  interpretation  has  even  been  prevalent. 

Thus  it  appears  evident  that  the  literal  sense  is  subordinate 
to  the  true  sense.  Those  holding  to  a  deeper  meaning  differ  as 
to  what  it  is. 

Hug  thought  it  written  with  political  design  in  the  time  of 
Hezekiah.  The  bride  represents  the  people  of  the  ten  tribes,  a 
remnant  who  wanted  to  be  taken  under  protection.  2  Chron. 
30 :  1.  The  citizens  of  Judea  oppose  this  union  as  untimely, 
and  represent  the  bride's  brother. 

Rosenmuller's  view  is  based  on  the  figures  of  Proverbs,  as 
Wisdom  is  there  personified  as  a  female;  he  makes  the  bride 
represent  "Wisdom.  Scriptural  analogies  show  the  marriage  to 
represent  the  relation  of  God  to  his  people.  The  only  question 
is  in  what  aspect  is  this  marriage  to  be  viewed  here. 

The  view  given  in  the  old  Targums  that  the  song  denotes  the 
relation  of  Jehovah  to  Israel  historically  and  prophetically.  The 
words  "draw  me"  refer  to  the  coming  out  of  Egypt.  Black- 
ness is  induced  by  the  sin  of  the  golden  calf.  The  bride  is  still 
comely  because  restored  from  sin  by  penitence. 

The  last  chapter  is  Messianic,  and  refers  to  the  resurrection. 

A  like  view  differing  in  details  is  that  of  Weiss. 

Moody  Stuart  makes  it  an  epitome  of  gospel  history. 

Song  opens  with  a  longing  for  the  advent. 

Then  (1 :  9-7  :  2)  allude  to  the  birth  at  Bethlehem.  The 
shepherds  and  wise  men  are  compared  to  horses. 

(2 :  8-2  :  15).  John  is  alluded  to  as  heralding  the  coming  of 
Christ.  The  bridal  chariot  equals  the  holy  human  body.  The 
mother  represents  the  Jewish  people.  The  sleeping  and  the 
search  refer  to  Gethsemane  and  the  bewilderment  of  the  disci- 
ples at  the  cross.  "The  little  sister"  refers  to  the  Gentile 
Church.  The  vineyard  let  out  to  keepers  is  an  allusion  to  the 
transmission  of  the  gospel  to  the  Gentiles.  The  song  ends  with 
a  cry  for  the  second  coming. 

Thrupp  finds  the  Messianic  advent  in  the  5:1.     What  pre- 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  133 

cedes  is  anticipation  of  and  waiting  for  Clirist's  coming.  What 
follows  alludes  to  times  subsequent  to  the  ascension. 

Hengstenberg  finds  the  advent  alluded  to  in  the  middle  of 
the  book.  The  bride  is  the  Jewish  Church.  The  daughters  of 
Jerusalem  refer  to  the  Gentile  Christians.  The  nightly  search 
refers  not  to  the  withdrawal  of  Christ's  bodily  presence,  but  of 
his  favor  and  love  from  the  Jews  since  they  rejected  him.  "  He 
puts  his  hand  in  the  door,"  manifesting  his  power  by  the 
church.  Israel  rises  to  open  the  door,  but  too  late.  The  watch- 
men refer  to  the  judgments  on  the  Jews. 

Some  have  sought  phases  of  experiences  of  Christian  believers 
as  the  spiritual  truth  implied  as  its  spiritual  meaning. 

The  fault  with  all  is,  they  are  too  specific  and  exclusive. 
The  true  mode  is  to  take  the  relations  of  earthly  love  and 
make  this  the  symbol  of  heavenly  love. 

DATE   AND   AUTHORSHIP. 

That  it  was  written  by  Solomon  is  seen  (1)  from  the  title,  (2) 
internal  corroborations.  Frequent  allusions  to  David  and  Solo- 
mon, (4:4;  3:7;  3:9;  8  :  11).  A  writer  later  than  Solomon, 
who  knew  only  by  history,  would  be  led  by  1  Kings  11  :  3, 
and  not  by  the  facts  of  this  earlier  period.  (3)  Frequent  men- 
tion of  locality  in  all  parts  of  the  land  is  such  as  to  make  the 
impression  that  the  division  of  the  kingdoms  had  not  yet  been 
made.  (4)  The  abundance  of  figures  from  nature  agrees  with 
what  we  know  of  Solomon.  Solomon  is  known  to  have  delighted 
in  horses,  1  Kings  10 :  28,  and  in  gardens.  (5)  Prosperity  and 
peace  abounding,  point  to  Solomon's  reign.  (6)  Solomon  did 
compose  many  books. 

Objections :  (1)  From  the  use  of  the  relative,  {she  for 
asher).  It  is  not  found  in  Proverbs  nor  in  the  two  Psalms  of 
Solomon.  It  is  found  in  Ecclesiastes.  But  they  say  Ecclesias- 
tes  is  not  by  Solomon.  This  form  is  not  of  late  date  since  it 
occurs  in  Genesis,  (Gen.  6  :  3).  (2)  Aramean  forms.  The 
poetry  of  the  Bible  is  full  of  such  forms  even  in  early  times. 
(3)  The  use  of  particular  words.  (4)  Solomon  praises  himself 
too  much.  But  the  praises  are  uttered  by  his  beloved,  and  it 
is  not  of  himself  or  earthly  love  that  Solomon  is  writing. 


Book  of  Job. 


Job  is  a  real  person. 
I.  Localities  are  real. 
II.  Names  are  not  significant  except  that  of  Job. 

III.  There  is  no  analogy  for  such  a  fiction. 

IV.  Ezek.  14 :  14.     "  Though  these  three  men,  Noah,  Dan- 

iel and  Job,  were  in  it,  they  should  deliver  but  their 
own  souls  by  their  righteousness,  saith  the  Lord 
God."  James  5  :  11.  '"'Ye  have  heard  of  the  pa- 
tience of  Job." 

It  is  not  necessary  to  assume  literality  of  all  the  details. 

It  is  not  an  allegory,  representing  the  calamities  of  the  Jews. 

The  period  is  the  patriarchal. 

The  author  and  age  of  the  book  are  unknown. 

The  book  has  been  referred  : 
I.  To  the  time  near  or  after  the  exile,  but  without  good 

reason. 
II.  To  the   time  of   Moses,  which   has  hitherto  been   the 
most  common  opinion.     This  opinion  is  based  chiefly 
on  the  absence  of  allusions  to  facts  or  revelations  of 
Mosaic  age. 

But  the  subject  may  not  have  called  for  such  allusions. 

III.  To  the  age  of  David  and  Solomon. 

This  is  favored  by   the  most  able  and  recent  continental 
scholars : 

1.  This  age  was  the  golden  age  of  Hebrew  poetry. 

2.  There  is  an  advance  on  the  teachings  of  the  law. 

3.  There  is  a  resemblance  to  the  Psalms  and  Proverbs. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  135 

Theme  of  the  book  is  the  sufferings  of  the  righteous. 
Job's  trials  are  not  only  to  test  his  constancy  as  stated  at  the 
outset,  but  also  to  correct  inward  corruption. 

I.  God  would  not  have  so  dealt  with  a  sinless  being. 
II.  Self   righteousness    is   seen    in    Job's    vindication    and 
complaints. 

III.  Confirmed  by  Elihu. 

IV.  Job  is  brought  to  penitence  and  this  is  the  condition  of 

his  restoration. 

Satan  accomplishing  the  purpose  of  God,  is  represented  by 
his  appearing  among  the  sons  of  God. 

Solution  of  problem  : 
I.  Confidence  in  God's  perfections. 

II.  Uses  of  affliction. 

The  dramatic  character  of  the  book  is  not  for  scenic  repre- 
sentation. 

The  action  is  not  external,  but  inward  and  spiritual,  and  all 
centres  about  the  temptation  of  Job. 


ANALYSIS. 

Theme. — Temptation  of  Job.     Introduction,  1 :  1-5.     Job's 
pious  character  and  happy  estate. 

First  stage  of  the  temptation,    1 :  6-22.     The   loss  of  his 
property  and  children ;  Job  victorious  over  the  temptation. 

Second  stage  of  the  temptation,  2  :  l-IO.     The  infliction  on 
his  own  person  ;  Job  still  victorious. 

Third  stage  of  the  temptation,  2:11;  42  :  17.    The  persist- 
ance  of  suffering  ;  Job's  struggle  and  ultimate  deliverance. 
I.  Preliminary  statement,  2  :  11-13.     The  coming  of  Job's 
three  friends. 

II.  The  struggle,  3-31. 

1.  Job's  complaint,  3. 

2.  Discourses  of  Job  and  his  three  friends,  4-31. 
First  series,  4-14.     Job  in  unrelieved  despair. 

Second  series,  15-21.      Job  rises  from  despair  to  hope  and 


136  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

vanquishes  the  temptation  in  his  second   reply  to  the  second 
friend. 

Third  series,  22-31.  Job  silences  his  friends,  but  the 
enigma  remains. 

III.  The  Deliverance,  32-42. 

1.  Elihu's  theoretical  solution,  32-37.  Which  is  prelim- 
inary to 

■   2.  The   J  ord's   practical  solution,  or   intervention    for  the 
rescue  of  Job,  38-42. 

(1)  Spiritual,  38  :  1 ;  42  :  6.     The  Lord  manifests  himself  to 

Job,  thereby  bringing  him  to  humility  and  penitence. 

(2)  External,  42  :  7-17.     Job  righted  before  his  friends,  and 

his  former  prosperity  doubled. 

Argument  turns  on  the^question  of  Job's  right  to  complain 
as  he  does,  chap.  3. 

Growing  harshness  of  his  friends.  Job's  discourse  divided 
by  chap.  19 ;  reference  to  vindication  in  the  future  state : 

1.  Climax  of  former  speeches. 

2.  Formality  of  introduction. 

3.  Terms  employed. 

4.  History  of  interpretation. 
Vindication  in  present  life  opposed  to  : 

1.  Job's  view  of  his  own  condition. 

2.  His  position  in  the  argument. 

Refutation  of  his  friends.     Two-fold  decision.     Elihu's  speech 
not  an  interpolation,  nor  does  it  represent  human  reason  or 
Btand  on  the  platform  of  the  friends : 
I.  Space  devoted  to  it. 
II.  His  position  not  identical  with  that  of  the  friends,  32  :  3. 
"  Against  his  three  friends  was  his  wrath  kindled 
because   they  had   found   no   answer,    and    yet   had 
condemned  Job." 
III.  The  discourse  of  the  Lord  is  then  made   to  inculcate 
simply  resignation  to  an  inscrutible  allotment,  which 
is  no  solution  at  all. 
Elihu,  theoretical  decision,   he  agrees   with  the  friends  in 
asserting   connection    between    suffering   and   sin;    he  differs, 


OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  137 

first,  suffering  is  disciplinary  as  well  as  penal ;  second,  regards 
sin  no  less  than  sins. 

The  Lord,  practical  decision.  Sublimity  of  discourse ;  no 
explanation  nor  arguments  inferred  from  the  issue. 

1.  Internal. 

2.  External. 

Discourse  subordinated  to  the  effect  to  be  produced  on  Job. 
The  lesson  not  simply  submission  to  a  power  which  man  cannot 
resist,  or  to  a  wisdom  which  he  cannot  fathom,  but  to  him  who 
is  infinitely  perfect. 

Design  of  God  is  inferred  from  the  result  which  was  not  only 
to  exhibit  Job's  constancy,  but  to  advance  his  holiness,  and  his 
welfare. 


18 


Bo  OK  OF  Proverbs. 


Harmony  of  God's  word,  and  Providence  as  a  general  fact : 
not,  however, 

1.  Making  utility  the  basis  of  obligation. 

2.  Subordinating  goodness  to  temporal  prosperity,  nor, 

3.  Inculcating  a  merely  outward  morality. 

Advantages  in  teaching  by  Proverbs.  These  differ  from  all 
others  ;  first,  in  being  religious,  and  second,  inspired.  Three 
divisions  : 

1.  Chapters  1-9.     1.  Introductory  verses,  chap.  1:7.     A 

connected  discourse,  commendation  of  wisdom,  coun- 
sels of  a  parent  to  a  son. 

2.  Personal  wisdom,  chap.  7. 

11.  Chapters  10-24.     Proverbs,  brief,  disconnected,  without 
arrangement. 

III.  Chapters  25-29.     Copied  out  by  men  of  Hezekiah. 

IV.  Appendix — Chapters  30-31.     Question  respecting  Agur 

and  Lemuel. 


Book  of  Ecclesiastes. 


Name  of  book. — The  preacher  is  identified  with  Solomon. 

Author. — I.  Declared  to  be  the  words  of  Solomon,  1 :  1. 
"  The  words  of  the  preacher  the  son  of  David,  king  in  Jerusalem." 

II.  It  has  always  been  regarded  as  his. 

Not  only  unbelieving  critics,  but  some  Evangelical  interpre- 
ters think  it  a  fiction  in  Solomon's  name. 

•  I.  The  book  is  said  to  speak  of  Solomon  as  he  could  not 
have  spoken  of  himself. 

The  preacher  was  king,  1 :  12.  "  I,  the  preacher,  was  king 
over  Israel  in  Jerusalem."  1 :  16.  '"'  I  have  gotten  more  wis- 
dom than  all  they  that  have  been  before  me,  in  Jerusalem." 
11  :  7-9. 

II.  The  writer  speaks  of  other  matters,  as  neither  Solomon 
nor  any  contemporary  could  have  done. 

1.  Vanity  is  ascribed  to  human  endeavors  and  implies  a 
period  of  depression  and  discouragement.     But 

(1)  Subject  here  discussed  is  appropriate  in  any  state  of  public 

affairs. 

(2)  These  views  are  quite  as  naturally  connected  with  a  sur- 

feit of  earthly  prosperity,  as  with  depression  and  dis- 


courasiement. 

O 


2.  The  injustice  of  judges  and  oppression  of  rulers  complained 
of  in  3  :  16 ;  4:1;  5:8;  10  :  5-7,  would  be  a  satire 
on  his  own  administration.     But 

(1)  No  ruler  can  correct  all  the  abuses  arising  from  his  sub- 
ordinates. 


140  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

(2)  Human  experience  is  here  viewed  in  general,  not  during 

his  own  reign  merely. 

(3)  There  were  burdens  even  under  Solomon.  1  Kings,  12  :  4. 
3.  Ecc.  7 :  10.     "  Say  not  then  what  is  the  cause  that  the 

former  days  were  better  than  these,  for  thou  dost  not 
inquire  wisely  concerning  this." 

But  this  does  not  prove  that  things  were  less  prosperous  then 
than  formerly. 

III.  The  Aramaic  character  of  the  language. 

The  peculiarity  of  the  Hebrew  is  explained  in  part  by  the 
nature  of  the  subject  and  mode  of  treatment. 

Aramaicisms  are  not  always  a  criterion  of  age. 

Solomon's  foreign  connections.  The  proverbs  of  this  book 
bear  a  close  resemblance  to  those  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs. 


DESIGN. 

Not  conflicting  opinions  of  various  sages,  not  enquirer  and 
teacher,  nor  same  speaker  in  various  states  of  minds,  but  con- 
tinuous and  consistent  discussion. 

Not  designed  to  teach  merely  the  vanity  of  earthly  pursuits 
nor  epicureanism,  nor  fatalism,  with  future  judgment,  nor  wis- 
dom in  general ;  but,  that  outward  prosperity  is  no  certain 
index  of  happiness  or  real  welfare,  these  are  only  for  the  good. 

This  is  explicitly  stated, 

1.  8:  12-13. 

2.  12:  13-14. 

3.  Man's  happiness  again  and  again  declared  to  be  found  not 
in  material  accumulations  which  are  vain,  but  in  quietly  serving 
God  in  the  lot  in  which  he  has  placed  him. 


/i 


n 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

305  De  Neve  Drive  -  Parking  Lot  17  •  Box  951388 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA  90095-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library  from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


DISCH 

'  JAN 


i^    J. 


Form  L9-Series 


AA    000  619  784    2 


V^ 


3   1158  00133  7921 


3S 

531 
3820 


Iw,;^r^;^:.m^:a!li|ntil^^i!f^^ 


